[0:02] Nice. All right. Um, well, if we're

[0:05] feeling ready, uh, Wade, Jason, I can

[0:08] kick us off with just some brief kind of

[0:09] overviews here and then, uh, I can pass

[0:11] over the reigns if that sounds good. Um,

[0:13] though, don't let me step on toes if

[0:15] there's any, uh, official meeting, uh,

[0:18] commencing that needs to occur. I'm not

[0:20] real familiar with the, uh, terminology

[0:22] that's required here.

[0:24] >> Robert Robert's rules.

[0:26] >> Yes. Yes. Thank you. We we'll go ahead

[0:27] and just uh start this meeting. I'll get us started. We'll do roll call

[0:32] and then we'll kick it over to you to

[0:33] give us look at the numbers um per the

[0:38] agenda. So everybody hopefully everybody

[0:41] got the agenda.

[0:42] >> If not uh leave the message in and we'll

[0:45] make sure it

[0:47] >> um welcome everybody. This is our uh RTP

[0:52] review meeting for the Utah HV Advisory

[0:56] Council. Um we

[1:00] are grateful for everybody being here.

[1:02] Um and I just want to especially take a

[1:07] minute and thank Eric. This is going to

[1:09] be his last meeting. Um so he's served

[1:14] nearly eight years on this council

[1:16] already. Well, pretty much eight years

[1:18] on this council already. and he's put in

[1:20] a lot of time and and uh been a very um

[1:24] knowledgeable resource to all of us and

[1:27] I I know that uh I've I've really

[1:30] appreciated all of your comments and all

[1:32] of your feedback during the meetings. Uh

[1:34] and I think I speak for all of us when I

[1:36] say that. Um thank you for your service

[1:38] and and thank you for joining us today.

[1:40] So appreciate you.

[1:44] >> Thank you.

[1:46] That being said, we'll do a quick roll

[1:49] call for everybody that's on the call.

[1:51] Um, just go I'm just going to go down

[1:54] the list as I see it. Um, just tell us

[1:56] your name and what you

[1:59] or who what uh position you are in

[2:02] relation to the board or and then we'll

[2:04] have members of the public that are on

[2:05] as well. So, we'll start with myself. My

[2:08] name is Jason Blankagel. I am the

[2:10] chairman of this council and member at

[2:12] large. Uh, we'll go to Brody.

[2:15] >> Brody Johnson, ATV representative.

[2:19] >> Okay, I've got Carter Moore.

[2:22] >> Hey, Carter Moore, assistant attorney

[2:24] general, counsel for the board.

[2:27] >> Okay, thank you, Carter. Um, Eric,

[2:33] » Eric Nelson, I represent the dealers.

[2:37] >> Okay, Evan.

[2:39] Hey guys, Evan B here, program

[2:41] administrator for the recreational

[2:42] trails program.

[2:44] Meen

[2:46] >> contracts and compliance manager for do

[2:50] >> Mike

[2:53] Cook, safety rep for the OV council.

[2:56] >> Nicole Nelson with the public lands

[3:01] policy coordinating office.

[3:03] >> Okay. Rachel

[3:06] >> Rachel Tker with the division of outdoor

[3:08] recreation. I oversee and manage the OP

[3:10] recreation grant.

[3:12] >> Okay. Russ

[3:16] » Russ Gazair with Utah State in um Trust

[3:20] Lands Administration.

[3:22] >> Thank you. Wade

[3:24] >> Wade Allenson state OV program manager

[3:28] >> and Scott

[3:30] >> uh Scott Wer uh off-road motorcycle rep

[3:34] >> and I'm showing Dave on here as well.

[3:37] David Jacobson.

[3:39] Is he on or is that

[3:44] on a different list?

[3:47] >> Okay.

[3:47] >> Yeah, we do not have Mr. Dave here with

[3:50] us.

[3:50] >> Okay.

[3:53] Awesome. Thanks everybody for

[3:55] being here. Um turn the time over for

[3:58] five minutes of a look at the numbers

[4:00] with Evan and uh we'll go from there.

[4:03] >> Cool.

[4:05] Well, um, let me just start off by

[4:07] saying another huge thank you and, uh,

[4:10] just, you know, not only for just being

[4:12] a part of this process in general to

[4:13] each of you, but just for, uh, you know,

[4:15] your patience as we rescheduled this

[4:17] meeting, your availability. I know it's

[4:19] a, a massive ask asking you guys to

[4:21] evaluate each of these projects and to

[4:23] just be, you know, part of this

[4:25] committee and a part of this process in

[4:26] general. So, um, thank you. That's all I

[4:28] can say. Just thank you so much. Um, let

[4:31] me let me pause real quick. I will say

[4:33] Dave is here.

[4:35] Dave, uh, I think, um, let's see. I'm

[4:38] gonna have our moderator move you. I

[4:41] think you're not classified.

[4:44] >> Okay.

[4:46] All right. Well, I'm going to keep going

[4:47] here. Um, and hopefully Dave, we can get

[4:49] you moved over to the the correct uh

[4:51] assignment so you can uh participate in

[4:53] the meeting. Um, but yes, just thank

[4:54] you. I we appreciate you all as being a

[4:56] part of this council and a part of this

[4:58] process. So, um, let me just briefly go

[5:00] over the numbers numbers because they

[5:02] have changed since we last met. So,

[5:04] since our last meeting, uh, we were

[5:06] actually able to identify an additional

[5:08] $325,000

[5:10] in additional funding through rollover.

[5:12] So, essentially projects that either

[5:14] came in just a little bit below budget

[5:17] uh, or projects that, uh, you know,

[5:18] maybe didn't finish their contract, you

[5:20] know, whatever happened, projects failed

[5:21] to get off the ground, that funding has

[5:23] now rolled over to and is available for

[5:25] this year. Um, so what that looks like

[5:28] is $1,887,000

[5:31] total available for RTP. Uh, and so if

[5:35] we just split that in half between

[5:36] motorized and non-motorized, the

[5:38] motorized share of that is $943,000.

[5:41] So we are able to award all of that

[5:43] today. We do not have to award all of

[5:45] that today. It'll be available for next

[5:47] year if you decide not to. Uh, but that

[5:48] is an option. Uh, and so we have 12

[5:51] projects that we'll be reviewing today.

[5:53] Uh, as of now, you guys have each

[5:55] received a list of those rankings based

[5:58] off of the scores provided by each of

[6:00] the council members. So, we'll touch

[6:02] into those here shortly. Um, just a

[6:04] quick review of the timeline here. So,

[6:06] we have our scoring meeting today. Uh,

[6:09] on May 14th, these will be submitted to

[6:12] uh the Utah Transportation Commission

[6:14] for um for getting on their list of

[6:17] approved projects. So, that's sort of

[6:18] the initial meeting to get on their

[6:20] approval list. And then on uh June 25th

[6:24] is when they will actually award those

[6:25] projects. So we're getting on the list

[6:28] uh on May 14th. So um all that being

[6:31] said, I just wanted to really briefly

[6:33] show you guys the tools you'll have at

[6:36] your disposal today. Um so for those of

[6:38] you following along online, I know this

[6:40] is a little bit of a different format

[6:41] than we're used to here. So um let me

[6:45] know if you if you don't have access to

[6:47] this yet. I can shoot it over to you in

[6:49] a message. But um I highly encourage you

[6:51] to use this scoring sheet to follow

[6:52] along today. So you can use this uh as I

[6:55] mentioned earlier, it is ranked based

[6:58] off of the scores provided by the

[6:59] council. So these projects are ranked by

[7:02] uh the highest score down to the lowest

[7:04] score. So the highest ranking project is

[7:06] the uh Grand County government's

[7:08] submission for the Moab Trail

[7:10] Collaborative Trail project. Um, but

[7:13] anyways, within this spreadsheet, just

[7:15] to highlight a few things, you can

[7:17] access the Salesforce application on

[7:20] this tab or sorry, on that cell, this

[7:23] link here will take you to the project

[7:25] folder. So, all of the project

[7:27] information is accessible to you here

[7:29] should you want to look at any of that

[7:30] during the scoring process. Um, what

[7:33] else is in here? Let's see. So, just,

[7:35] you know, the amount requested, all that

[7:36] fun stuff. Uh, one more thing I did want

[7:39] to highlight as well. If you scroll over

[7:40] to the right side of this scoring sheet,

[7:43] you'll see if it was determined to be a

[7:45] high priority project uh based off

[7:47] council member input. So, if this box is

[7:50] checked, that means that council member

[7:52] ranked this as a high scoring priority.

[7:55] Um something also you can use this for,

[7:57] there is a little note section here. If

[7:59] you want to take any notes to refer back

[8:01] to for these, um please make a copy just

[8:04] so that we're not all seeing your notes.

[8:05] Unless you want us to read your notes,

[8:06] that's fine, too. Um, that's that. What

[8:10] else do we got going on? Um, I showed

[8:12] you guys the backup folder. You can

[8:14] access that through that scoring sheet

[8:15] that I just showed you. Um, and then

[8:18] just another quick overview of just far

[8:20] as like some of the the guidelines for

[8:22] how uh the Federal uh highway

[8:24] administration has told us we should be

[8:26] spending this funding. Um, you know, we

[8:29] split it down the middle and that tends

[8:30] to cover most of the needs described

[8:32] here. But there is essentially a

[8:34] requirement that 30% goes to motorized,

[8:36] 30% non-motorized, 40 goes to diverse,

[8:39] which can mean either a non-motorized

[8:42] and motorized collaborative effort or it

[8:45] can mean a project that supports

[8:47] multiple types of uses. So for instance,

[8:49] a trail that could be used for

[8:50] snowmmoiling part of the year and for

[8:52] offhighway vehicles the rest of the

[8:54] year. So that diverse category is very broad. Um the only other thing I

[8:58] want to highlight is that we have 5%

[9:01] available for education projects total.

[9:03] So that 5% total is $94,000.

[9:07] So about 47 thou 47,000

[9:10] uh for for motorized education. That's

[9:12] it. I'm going to stop talking and I'm

[9:15] going to pass it over um to you guys.

[9:19] >> Okay. Uh just a question. So if we don't spend or or if we don't

[9:26] assign all of the budget today, that

[9:30] money will stay as motorized

[9:33] uh in a motorized bucket for next year

[9:35] and it won't go to the non-motorized

[9:37] site. Is that what I'm hearing?

[9:40] >> Yeah. So, in previous years, you know,

[9:42] there's it's really been a the motorized

[9:44] category has been underutilized and

[9:46] it's, you know, kind of just been

[9:47] transferred over to the non-motorized

[9:49] side for that availability. Um, I I

[9:52] think uh we have that flexibility and,

[9:55] you know, since we're seeing more

[9:56] participation with this council here, I think it makes total sense to, you

[10:00] know, have this money roll over and be

[10:02] available as long as it's spent within

[10:04] the uh the specified kind of

[10:06] availability period. So we do have a a

[10:08] limitation as far as timelines when it

[10:10] comes to spending this funding. So we

[10:12] have up to three years I believe uh for

[10:14] to to spend our aortionment. So as long

[10:17] as it's able to be spent within that time period, it's available to the

[10:20] motorized category.

[10:22] >> Okay. Thank you for clarifying that.

[10:26] >> Okay. Did you cover resource rundown

[10:29] then?

[10:30] >> Yep. I covered the resource rundown. If

[10:31] you want me to pull up the agenda real

[10:33] quick.

[10:36] » Okay. Yeah, as far as um timelines here.

[10:39] So, that's the resource rundown. Yeah,

[10:41] if you want to just uh run through the

[10:42] scoring process and what you guys like

[10:44] to see today, that'd be that'd be

[10:45] helpful.

[10:46] >> Yeah, for sure. So, um scoring overview

[10:51] um and Wade, chime in if you've got an

[10:54] opinion, but basically, we've got these

[10:56] 12 applications. We've um all hopefully

[11:00] taken the time to review them. um we can

[11:03] go through each of them as needed or if

[11:07] there is um somebody that proposes to

[11:10] approve a block of them at a time, we

[11:13] can do that as well as we've done in

[11:15] other meetings. Um so uh we what we'll

[11:19] probably do is we'll just go through um

[11:22] look at the list together and if there's

[11:25] an identifying of the highest ranked

[11:27] that you guys want to block together and

[11:29] approve we can go that route and then

[11:31] take a closer look at the ones that were

[11:33] more in question and discuss those. Um

[11:38] hopefully you guys have taken your notes

[11:40] uh have good ideas on what questions you

[11:42] have and then we can discuss those as

[11:45] needed. Do we we don't have anybody from

[11:48] We don't have any applicants on this

[11:50] meeting, do we?

[11:51] >> We do not.

[11:53] >> Okay.

[11:55] And then Evan, you have work been

[11:58] working with the applicants. Have you

[12:00] reviewed these applications with them

[12:02] and and have more information that's one

[12:05] on than what is on the actual

[12:07] applications that you could speak to or

[12:10] >> happy to do so, you know, on a project

[12:12] per project basis. But yeah, I have the

[12:14] same information you guys do. So

[12:16] everything you guys have seen, I've seen

[12:17] as well.

[12:18] >> Okay, that sounds good. Wade, do you

[12:21] have anything else on that?

[12:23] >> Um, I just bring you up to date. Uh, the

[12:26] Emery County one application 005649.

[12:31] Um, that one is connected with a part of

[12:35] a match with OVR grant that they applied

[12:38] for. And just to update the council on

[12:41] that, they actually um hired their two

[12:44] summer Hala uh yesterday. I sat in on

[12:47] those interviews. Um so that's moving

[12:50] along and this one's kind of in

[12:51] conjunction with that one. So keep that

[12:53] in mind.

[12:55] Okay.

[12:58] Thanks, Wade.

[13:01] All right. Um that being said, we'll we

[13:06] will open it up. Is there anybody from

[13:07] the public that wants to make public

[13:09] comment? We ask that uh if you do,

[13:12] please keep your comments limited to 3

[13:15] minutes each. Uh and but if so, we'll

[13:19] give the uh give the floor to anybody

[13:22] from the public that may be on that

[13:23] wants to uh make comment.

[13:33] Okay. Well, seeing none, we'll go on to

[13:35] the next item on our agenda, which is

[13:37] the scoring.

[13:40] >> So, Evan, do you want to go ahead and

[13:42] share the scoring sheet so we can all

[13:44] see it?

[13:45] >> Sure.

[13:46] Let's see here. Bear with me.

[13:57] All right.

[14:07] Okay.

[14:09] Do you have the ranked one up that you

[14:12] can share?

[14:13] >> Oh, I'm sorry. Yes. Bear with me here,

[14:16] guys. Sorry.

[14:32] I closed out all my windows to reduce

[14:34] the clutter and look where it got me.

[14:35] Let's see.

[14:58] Do you want me to show I got it. Sorry

[15:00] [laughter] about that.

[15:01] >> Okay.

[15:02] >> All right. She's ready.

[15:04] >> Awesome. Sounds good. Okay. Um

[15:08] so

[15:10] here's our rank list. Um

[15:13] top few projects, uh 82 and up, we've

[15:16] got the Moab Area collaborative trail

[15:19] maintenance. um southeast sea style

[15:21] project prep, heavy equipment trail work

[15:24] and improving motorized recreation

[15:25] opportunities

[15:27] in the Moab BLM

[15:30] area.

[15:33] So, we had a few looks like we had a few

[15:36] that were unsure on these, but most

[15:38] people said recommend them as a high

[15:41] funding priority. Is there any any

[15:44] discussion on these top three? Um, looks

[15:48] like Scott, you and Brody

[15:51] and uh, Sheriff Curtis had also had a no

[15:55] fund on these

[15:57] and Russ had a no fund on a couple of

[15:59] them as well. Any any other any

[16:02] questions or any discussion on any of

[16:04] these three?

[16:06] >> Maybe I'll just quickly add here that I

[16:09] was out of the country while we were

[16:11] ranking these. I have read them now. So,

[16:14] I have no issues with the first three

[16:17] that we're looking at.

[16:19] >> Okay.

[16:21] Thanks, Nicole.

[16:28] » And Jason, I'll just note I'm happy to

[16:30] pull up any any maps, photos, letters of

[16:33] support, all that fun stuff. So, just

[16:34] let me know.

[16:35] >> Oh, I actually do want to take back what

[16:38] I said. I think I trying to figure out

[16:41] if it's the same one. The BLM for Grand

[16:43] County one I do want to have a little

[16:44] bit of a discussion on.

[16:46] >> Okay.

[16:48] >> Yeah. Let me know when you're when

[16:50] that's an appropriate time.

[16:51] >> Yeah. Go ahead.

[16:53] >> Um so that one's the the one that I

[16:56] think it is. We know that I have a

[16:58] tendency to, you know, re review the

[17:01] wrong projects at the wrong time. But

[17:02] when I read the application for the BLM

[17:05] in Grand County, um there was some

[17:07] discussion in the application about

[17:09] improving

[17:11] the um an obstacle on Pritchette Canyon

[17:14] called Down and Dirty. And after talking

[17:16] to some of the folks in the Jeep

[17:18] community,

[17:19] um they feel like maybe it's just you

[17:23] need to kind of um block off access to

[17:26] the stream where people are bypassing

[17:28] the obstacle and not actually improve

[17:30] the obstacle. So I do have some concerns

[17:32] with this one. You know, people are

[17:34] calling it like a gatekeeper obstacle

[17:36] and it's not, you know, it's much easier

[17:38] than many of the other obstacles on

[17:40] this. So, the Jeep community has a

[17:43] little bit of concern over them

[17:44] improving that obstacle.

[17:48] So, I guess on that one, I would like to

[17:50] say if we're going to fund it, I feel

[17:52] like the BLM should work very closely

[17:55] with the Red Rock um four-wheel drive

[17:57] club down in Moab and the um what do

[18:01] they call that? The Grand County Trails

[18:03] Committee, motorized Trails Committee.

[18:07] And it sounds like there was some

[18:08] discussion on this and it wasn't.

[18:11] completely reflected in the application

[18:14] the way that they thought it had been

[18:15] discussed.

[18:20] » Go ahead, Scott.

[18:22] >> Uh when I was reading that application,

[18:25] they did talk about bypass roots and I

[18:28] was a little concerned. Uh let's say if

[18:30] you're out there and you're saying,

[18:31] "Hey, I'm going to go try this new

[18:33] trail." And you get halfway through it

[18:35] and you go, "I can't make it through

[18:37] this portion right here." There needs to

[18:40] be some balance in there if there are

[18:42] routes around it already that maybe they

[18:45] think about it before closing that extra

[18:48] route so maybe that somebody that can't

[18:50] make it through it has an opportunity to

[18:53] continue on on the trail. Uh I I realize

[18:56] that you know you get braiding of trails

[18:58] because the obstacles too hard, but

[19:00] there uh I went through the devil's

[19:03] racetrack here over the weekend and

[19:05] there were individuals in there that

[19:07] were struggling in places and they were

[19:10] there were places to go around the

[19:12] obstacle. And so I I think maybe perhaps

[19:15] you put that back on the people in

[19:18] charge in the area and say, "Hey, uh the

[19:22] people that are utilizing that trail."

[19:25] Uh but I I do have some concerns about

[19:28] just going and blocking off any uh uh

[19:31] route that maybe makes it easier to get

[19:33] around it.

[19:39] » Go ahead, Mike.

[19:41] Yeah, I would second that um thought

[19:45] from Nicole and Scott. Uh I know I was

[19:49] trying to look and see if this is I

[19:51] don't think this is the only one that

[19:53] they talked about uh

[19:56] making an actually taking the obstacle

[19:59] and chiseling the rock out to make it

[20:01] easier. And one of them, I can't

[20:03] remember if this is it or not, has a

[20:05] picture of the um of them fencing off

[20:09] the current bypass, what people are

[20:11] using as a bypass. And I think that they

[20:14] really need to I understand obstacles

[20:17] get harder over time, but if there's a

[20:20] bypass that you could solidify and and

[20:24] make to where it's sustainable and

[20:27] everything, then why not use it? Um, and

[20:32] then that still maintains the difficulty

[20:34] of the trail, but allows

[20:38] um maybe an obstacle that has got a

[20:41] little bigger and harder allows people

[20:43] that that experience. And so I would

[20:47] second that and I don't really mind

[20:49] having them fund it or funding it, but I

[20:52] do think that we probably ought to kind

[20:55] of

[20:57] advise that they instead of change the

[20:59] obstacle, they look at making a reroute

[21:02] for that obstacle or a bypass. I mean,

[21:06] >> yeah. And one of the things that was

[21:08] kind of talked about in the

[21:10] communications that I had was, you know,

[21:11] there's wench anchor points on many of

[21:14] the other obstacles in this um

[21:17] Bridgetette Canyon area, you know, and

[21:19] this one doesn't have any. So maybe

[21:21] that's the solution. But yeah, maybe

[21:23] making the obstacle easier isn't the

[21:26] right one, especially for one that's

[21:27] considered, you know, the hardest trail

[21:29] in Moab to make obstacles easier.

[21:36] Okay, thanks Nicole. Another thing on

[21:38] this application I noticed too, they had a site plan for a parking lot

[21:44] and it looked like most of the parking

[21:47] stalls in that lot were pullin and back

[21:50] out stalls which may not necessarily be

[21:54] conducive to the uh OV community. A lot of people use trailers. Um, and

[22:01] the pull in and back out option. It's

[22:04] not this one. It's it's one of the other

[22:06] ones.

[22:08] >> One second. Let's see.

[22:09] >> No, this one has a pull in and back out

[22:14] or a pull in and not really. This one

[22:18] might trailers, too.

[22:20] >> Yeah, I don't think this one's as bad. I

[22:23] mean, especially if it's all just a

[22:25] gravel area, people will just pull

[22:27] through. But the other one is

[22:30] they're trying to leave trees in place

[22:32] and

[22:34] yeah, it's just not uh not very

[22:37] conducive for pull through.

[22:38] >> Oh, here I think I see

[22:40] >> that one trail head. Yeah.

[22:44] >> So,

[22:47] anyways, that one didn't look as much

[22:49] like a motorized trail head.

[22:53] Scott, go ahead. Uh, one of the other

[22:56] concerns I have, um, we have like three

[22:59] or four grants in the same area to do

[23:02] trail work and, uh, you know, I I don't

[23:07] know how many grants we should have in a

[23:10] kind of the same area, but I I hope

[23:13] they're collaborating to some extent

[23:16] with each other to make sure whatever

[23:18] they're doing is it's done efficiently

[23:20] and that we get the most out of our

[23:22] money and and maybe perhaps

[23:25] uh we try to put some way that we

[23:28] require some type of collaboration with

[23:30] groups that are working in the same

[23:32] area. Uh maybe not necessarily on the

[23:35] same trail, but uh uh

[23:40] I don't know. That's something to rattle

[23:41] around in my head a little bit.

[23:45] >> Thanks, Scott. Go ahead, Mike.

[23:48] Yeah, I had the same thought and I think

[23:50] I visited with Scott and Wade about this

[23:52] a little bit that that I have concerns

[23:55] that because

[23:57] um one trail maintenance crew might think,

[24:04] "Oh, we need to wipe that obstacle out."

[24:07] And the other one might go, "No, that's

[24:08] what makes it fun." So, and if they're

[24:11] working in the same area, then that is a

[24:13] possibility that they either duplicate

[24:16] work or or mess each other's work up,

[24:19] you know. Um, I'm with Scott. I think

[24:23] that

[24:24] with everybody wanting a trail crew now,

[24:28] uh, I have no problem. I love seeing

[24:30] trail crews and and actual maintenance

[24:33] being done, but but I do think that

[24:36] [snorts] where there's multiple trail

[24:38] crews in the same area,

[24:40] um there needs to be one person that's

[24:43] directing that rate, one person, one

[24:46] group that's actually directing and

[24:49] making the decisions on what what's

[24:52] being done to the trails. um you know,

[24:55] if it's on BLM, maybe the BLM needs to

[24:57] go, "Yeah, we're okay with that project

[24:59] and this type of project um for this

[25:03] section or or whatever." But but I do

[25:06] think that that's something that we may

[25:09] need to address in the future is that we

[25:14] is that if there's overlapping, you

[25:17] know, maybe if there's a trail crew in

[25:19] the area, we um increase that trail crew

[25:22] instead of creating a whole new one or

[25:24] something like that, you know. So,

[25:30] » okay. Thanks. Uh, Nicole,

[25:33] >> I was just going to say I recognize the

[25:35] same thing that Wheeler and Mike just

[25:37] said that, you know, we have a lot of

[25:40] grants coming out of the same same area.

[25:42] So, yeah, that's probably something that

[25:45] we should look at and kind of consider.

[25:48] So, I'm glad that we're talking about

[25:49] it.

[25:51] >> Yeah. Eric, you've got your hand up.

[25:54] >> Yeah. So, I've been down in this area of

[25:57] the state quite a bit recently and uh

[26:03] it

[26:05] I guess there is so much use that I

[26:07] can't see

[26:10] more maintenance really hurting it. And

[26:12] from what I understand,

[26:15] all of these entities have to work

[26:17] through the government agencies to do

[26:20] the work. So the overall project should

[26:23] be

[26:24] overseen or at least known about and and

[26:28] I definitely understand the Pritchette,

[26:29] you know, I I saw that and went, well,

[26:31] that's the that's the reason for

[26:32] Pritchette is making it too hard. You

[26:35] know, that's that's what people want in

[26:36] there. But I can't think of any other

[26:39] place on pretty much any other trail

[26:41] that you'd want to go in and and an

[26:45] additional work would would be a bad

[26:47] thing. And I actually love this because

[26:52] all of these are for trail work and it

[26:55] is so needed and signage and all that

[26:58] stuff. I have I've enjoyed this this uh

[27:01] grant this FT you know the

[27:05] this grant process RTP more than the

[27:09] rest of our our OVR grants just because

[27:13] it's actually work. And so I don't know.

[27:16] I I'm not too worried about them doing

[27:20] the right thing when they're getting

[27:21] down there. I think it's great feedback,

[27:23] Nickel on Pritchette, that we just say,

[27:25] "Hey, some people like that hard. Is

[27:28] there something else we can do there?"

[27:29] But actually trying to organize a a land

[27:33] manager or someone to go out and and

[27:36] organize all these trail groups. I don't know if I agree, but that's just

[27:39] my opinion. So,

[27:43] >> Dave,

[27:44] >> thanks Eric. Dave, you've got your hand

[27:45] up.

[27:50] » One's kind of Jeep focused, one's kind

[27:52] of motorcycle focused, and the other

[27:54] one's like trail focused. So, not as big

[27:57] a concern to me.

[28:00] >> Okay. Thank you.

[28:04] » Go ahead, Nicole.

[28:06] Wade, you probably know this, but don't

[28:09] they have um something similar to Emery

[28:11] County down there where they have like a

[28:12] trails committee where all the different

[28:15] entities come together and kind of

[28:16] discuss what's happening? And I mean,

[28:18] would that be a a venue for just

[28:21] discussion on these to make sure

[28:23] everybody's kind of talking?

[28:25] >> Well, and also keep in mind the council

[28:27] is paying Katon down there to do this

[28:31] stuff. the county has a coordinator then

[28:35] and you know maybe we need to put a

[28:37] little emphasis on Katon in doing this

[28:39] too and keeping his eyes on that because

[28:41] we are paying him out of an OVR grant

[28:44] and you are right Nicole you have the

[28:47] trail mix um the motor Moab trail

[28:50] council you actually have a couple of

[28:51] them down there where these forums come

[28:54] together and and a good pulse on it for

[28:56] the motorized community is Cliff Cliff

[28:58] Coons participates in all these too and and he can keep an eye on them for

[29:04] us as well.

[29:08] » Yeah, certainly. And I I agree to kind

[29:10] of David and Eric's consensus that

[29:15] yeah, the uh right with respect is all

[29:18] the single tracks, the other is the Jeep

[29:20] and um Grand County is just trying to

[29:23] fill in the gaps in between. So, but

[29:26] yep.

[29:29] Okay. Um any more discussions on these

[29:31] top three?

[29:38] We I I guess uh

[29:41] we just vote on them like we do the over

[29:45] Evan.

[29:46] >> Yep. Absolutely.

[29:47] >> Okay.

[29:49] Go ahead, Nicole. Before we vote, I

[29:53] mean, one thing that's kind of coming to

[29:55] my mind is

[29:57] especially with that one where at um

[29:59] Peret Canyon and down and dirty. I mean,

[30:01] I don't know really what the cost

[30:03] difference is, but I mean, is that one

[30:06] where maybe if they're reconsidering

[30:09] what's happening on down and dirty, they

[30:11] might need less funding. So, maybe

[30:13] that's like is now a time to talk about

[30:16] do we kind of reduce the amount of

[30:18] funding? Do we give them the full amount

[30:20] of funding? Like what's the Yeah, I'm

[30:23] not sure the procedure there.

[30:26] [clears throat]

[30:30] » You can certainly recommend a different

[30:32] funding amount. Um, and if if that's

[30:36] something that you would want to propose

[30:38] and somebody wants to second it and we

[30:41] can look at that if if that's a route

[30:44] you want to go. Um,

[30:48] and then I guess Evan, you would just be

[30:51] giving them that condition on the

[30:53] approval.

[30:54] >> Yeah, exactly. So, just let me know. I

[30:56] can pull up any of these budgets and we

[30:57] can take a closer look and you can

[30:58] specifically fund, you know, elements

[31:01] within their budget and then you can

[31:02] specifically not or specifically exclude

[31:04] any elements you don't want to see.

[31:09] » Let me run through their budget really

[31:11] quick. Maybe we can work voting on the

[31:13] top two while I'm looking at the budget

[31:15] on that third one.

[31:19] » Yeah, it's gonna be hard to divide that

[31:21] one out because they don't necessarily

[31:23] have a specific area. They just have all

[31:26] of their materials and all of their

[31:27] labor labor grouped together.

[31:30] >> Right.

[31:32] >> So, I'll read this out if if that's

[31:34] helpful in case people can't see it. Um

[31:36] $40,000 going to signage, 10,000 to

[31:39] wooden fencing for delineation, about

[31:42] 5,000 for various tools, 15,000 for uh

[31:45] additional delineation materials like

[31:47] post and cables, uh trail marking

[31:50] materials, metal kiosks. Um and then let

[31:53] me just kind of fast forward here. These

[31:55] big ticket items at the bottom would be

[31:57] $30,000 for metal kiosks, and then

[32:00] $40,000 for trail work, planning, and on

[32:03] the ground labor.

[32:10] Yeah, that's going to be hard to to pull

[32:12] [clears throat] out, you know, specific

[32:14] amounts because I mean there's so many

[32:16] other parts of that project and I do

[32:18] think it is good and other parts need I

[32:22] just worry about the down and dirty part

[32:29] and maybe it is funding it with the you

[32:32] know with the um caveat that they need

[32:37] to work with that Grand County Motorized

[32:40] Trails Committee and the Red Rock

[32:42] Four-Wheel Drive Club on PR or yeah,

[32:45] Pritchette down and dirty and make sure

[32:48] that they're not making it too easy. I

[32:52] mean, one of the things that I've had

[32:54] come back to our office and on other

[32:56] trail work items, and you know, I can

[33:00] agree and disagree with folks, but you

[33:02] know, they've told me that trail work

[33:03] has made a trail so easy that it's not

[33:05] even fun anymore. So, that's something

[33:07] I've been trying to watch out for is,

[33:09] you know, level of trail difficulty and

[33:12] trying to match the work to it.

[33:16] Evan, can that be put into the contract

[33:20] um that the recipient work with Red Rock

[33:24] and the Moab Trail to make sure that the

[33:27] work being done there meets the needs of

[33:29] the user community? Can that be language

[33:32] we add to give Nicole a little comfort

[33:34] on that?

[33:36] >> You know, we have our our contracts

[33:37] guru, Meen, here. I don't know if Meen,

[33:39] you're able to weigh in on that. Um, but

[33:41] I will note just from a, you know, from

[33:43] my awareness of the applicant, they work

[33:45] very closely together. Um, the Grand

[33:47] County BLM and then the county

[33:49] themselves coordinated on all of these

[33:51] efforts that are actually the top three

[33:54] ranked projects. Um, but so and then our

[33:57] trail our trail crew is also pretty

[33:59] engaged with that. But, uh, Marine, I

[34:00] don't know if you're able to to weigh in

[34:02] on on contract language.

[34:03] >> Yeah, we we can put it contingent upon.

[34:05] So any any requirements you guys put

[34:08] towards a project, I include in the

[34:10] contract. Um so yes, it would be in

[34:12] there.

[34:13] >> And and you're okay in putting in there

[34:16] a a group or a local user group.

[34:19] >> Yeah. But they would need to collaborate

[34:21] with them.

[34:22] >> Okay.

[34:23] >> That that would be great because I did

[34:24] call the Red Rock Four-Wheel Drive Club

[34:27] and they the way that I read I read them

[34:30] the application how it was worded in

[34:31] there and they're like that's not how we

[34:34] discussed it. So, I think there's some

[34:36] miscommunication there. So, I would love

[34:37] for them to talk again.

[34:40] >> Okay. Thanks, Nicole. Eric, you've got

[34:42] your hand up.

[34:44] >> Yeah. Just just real quick, I I love

[34:46] this conversation. I love how engaged we

[34:49] all are. There there's an example, a

[34:51] specific example that uh was kind of

[34:54] surprising to me, but at the same time,

[34:56] I was pleased to see it. So, there's an

[34:58] obstacle called a white knuckle on the

[35:02] be behind the rocks trail down there,

[35:04] and it's always been, it's a big wall

[35:06] you drop off. It's always been pretty

[35:09] scary in a two-seater, in a Jeep. I

[35:12] mean, all of it. It just depends how

[35:14] many rocks are at the bottom. I think a

[35:16] lot of us are familiar with it. But, um,

[35:19] there was some trail work that went on

[35:21] and made a slightly easier route off the

[35:24] side. And the hard part is still open.

[35:28] It's still available. People are still

[35:29] dropping off it, but it also allows the

[35:33] people that

[35:35] um don't want to hook up a rope to them

[35:38] or just, you know, it's [snorts] it's

[35:41] pretty intense. These trails down there

[35:43] are pretty intense. And so that I

[35:46] thought was a perfect blend of trail

[35:49] work, making it safer, and then still

[35:52] retaining the hard part. And so

[35:56] again, you know, I I like that we can

[35:58] maybe throw in some some verbiage into

[36:00] the contract. I think that's important,

[36:02] but at the same time, I think there's

[36:04] balance to all of it. And so, yeah, I

[36:08] love it. But

[36:09] >> well, if I just briefly note, sorry, cut

[36:12] you off, Eric.

[36:14] >> I was just going to note, uh, within the

[36:15] budget, no, I'll just show you guys real

[36:17] quick. um within this Grand County

[36:19] budget or sorry within this BLM budget

[36:22] um they did list a couple volunteer

[36:24] groups that would be helping out with

[36:25] the ININD supports just to give an idea

[36:27] of some of the the groups they're

[36:28] working with here. Um Ride with Respect

[36:31] four-wheel uh kind of division has been

[36:33] listed as an inind partner. Tread

[36:36] Lightly and Grand County's uh motorized

[36:39] uh team has all been listed as uh as

[36:41] volunteer groups providing an estimated

[36:43] $12,000 worth of of collaboration here.

[36:46] So just just listing that as well.

[36:51] » I think that's Red Rock four-wheel

[36:53] drive, not regles or

[36:54] >> Oh, thank you. Thank you.

[36:58] » Okay.

[37:00] >> Yeah. So with the I guess with the

[37:03] caveat of adding that language to the

[37:05] contract.

[37:07] Um

[37:10] yeah, sounds like

[37:11] >> I don't know how to raise my hand, but

[37:12] I've got a question.

[37:15] Yeah, go ahead, Brett.

[37:17] >> Um, in addition to Red Rock

[37:19] four-wheelers, um, Moab Friends for

[37:22] Wheeling

[37:24] should be included in the discussion of

[37:27] uh, on on down and dirty,

[37:32] unlike uh, White Uncle Hill, Down and

[37:35] Dirty doesn't really have place for a

[37:37] bypass,

[37:40] right? So,

[37:42] it's it's freaking gnarly, but

[37:45] I don't I don't know what you're going

[37:46] to do for a bypasser, you know. So, I

[37:48] just I want to make sure that both those

[37:50] groups are included in it because Jeff

[37:52] Stevens with uh Moab Friends for

[37:54] Wheeling uh does a lot of the trail work

[37:56] in coordination with the BLM down there.

[37:59] They have a different approach than Red

[38:01] Rock.

[38:03] They're more about having, you know, the

[38:06] actual users, not just cheap Safari

[38:08] users.

[38:10] So, they both are great groups, but they each have a different approach.

[38:17] » That's all.

[38:18] >> Okay. Thanks, Brad.

[38:19] >> I like that. Maybe I would make that

[38:20] motion that we approve the top three

[38:23] with um the third one having some

[38:26] language added to the contract that says

[38:28] that BLM should work with Red Rocks. And

[38:31] Brett, what did what did you call that

[38:32] other group?

[38:35] >> Moab friends for Wheelers.

[38:38] >> Okay. And add Moab Friends for Wheelers

[38:42] and have the BLM coordinate with both of

[38:44] them to make sure that we're not, you

[38:46] know, making an obstacle much easier

[38:50] than it needs to be for the trail.

[38:53] >> Okay. Um, and, uh, Jeff wrote a note of

[38:58] support in one of these grants. I don't

[39:00] remember which one it was, but uh you

[39:03] can get all his information from that

[39:04] letter

[39:07] >> or I can forward it.

[39:10] >> Okay, we've got a motion to approve the

[39:12] top three with those conditions as

[39:14] listed by Nicole. Do we have a second?

[39:17] >> This is Brody. I second that.

[39:20] >> Okay, Brody seconds. Let's do a roll

[39:23] call vote on this. Um

[39:27] >> Hey, Jason. Is that the first two or the

[39:29] first three? first three.

[39:31] >> Okay.

[39:34] >> Uh, let's go. Hold on. Let me pull up my

[39:37] list again. Let's go. Brett,

[39:40] >> yes.

[39:41] >> Broie,

[39:43] >> yes.

[39:44] >> Cheryl,

[39:49] » I don't vote. Thank you.

[39:51] >> Okay, that's right. And Dave, you don't

[39:54] vote either.

[39:55] >> Correct. Recommended non- voting. Okay.

[39:59] Eric,

[40:00] >> yes.

[40:02] Mike,

[40:04] >> yes.

[40:05] >> Nicole,

[40:07] >> yes.

[40:08] >> Russ,

[40:10] >> yes.

[40:11] >> Scott,

[40:12] >> yes.

[40:14] >> I will vote yes as well.

[40:16] >> Thanks for voting for me, Scott. I want

[40:18] the yes.

[40:19] >> I'm sorry.

[40:21] >> It's all good.

[40:24] Okay. And those first three are

[40:29] four.

[40:30] >> Yeah.

[40:31] >> Go ahead, Evan.

[40:32] >> No, I was just going to note that says

[40:34] $32,000 worth of projects awarded. Um,

[40:38] and so all three of those are in Grand

[40:41] County and all three of those are trail

[40:43] maintenance projects. So,

[40:46] >> okay,

[40:46] >> that leaves us with a balance of uh

[40:51] 641,000.

[40:53] >> Okay, sounds good. Thank you. Uh, next

[40:55] one on this list is the Utah Avalanche

[40:58] Center motorized backcountry safety

[41:00] infrastructure project. U, looks like

[41:03] several people on this one recommended

[41:04] not to uh, fund it as a high priority.

[41:09] Um, any any discussion? Please raise

[41:13] your hand and we'll get to you as we get

[41:15] to you.

[41:18] Go ahead, Mike.

[41:20] Um,

[41:22] this one I have uh I don't know. Um,

[41:28] I mean, I'm the new guy on the block

[41:29] here, but but I've been, you know, just

[41:33] seems like we're funing funneling a ton

[41:35] of money into this. And I know it's a

[41:38] good thing and safety and stuff, but it just seems like the project

[41:43] that'll never end and keeps asking and they have, you know, they

[41:48] have um this one and then they have a

[41:52] nonprofit that we give money. you I mean

[41:54] we gave pretty good chunk out of the

[41:55] over and and pretty good chunk out of

[41:58] this and um and I'm not necessarily

[42:01] saying that we shouldn't fund it but um but I

[42:08] mean if you took that 87,000

[42:10] or 85,000

[42:12] you could probably almost buy a beacon

[42:14] for almost every snowmoiler in the state

[42:17] you know um so I mean that might you

[42:21] know if you gave what we've given them

[42:24] this year, you probably could buy a

[42:25] beacon for everybody in the state pretty

[42:28] much, you know. And and I think I think

[42:32] at some point we might want to start

[42:36] looking at at maybe a more practical way

[42:39] of I mean if they took that money and

[42:41] actually put on courses with beacons

[42:45] that gave people beacons and taught them

[42:47] at a reduced price, we'd probably save a

[42:50] lot more lives than than the you know it

[42:54] would probably be in my opinion it would

[42:58] probably be more effective than um than

[43:04] just putting all this money into just

[43:07] forecasting, you know. Um I just uh I

[43:11] just think that we probably ought to in

[43:14] the you know just maybe kind of start

[43:18] looking at or maybe at the avalanche

[43:20] place maybe ought to start looking at

[43:22] different ways. And then I I don't know.

[43:27] I have real heartache with the

[43:28] ambassador program part of it. I I just

[43:33] don't think that that's a good use of

[43:35] money to have somebody sitting at a

[43:37] trail head. Um I just think it's

[43:43] uh I just don't think that's a good use

[43:46] of money. So, if we do end up funding

[43:48] it, um, which I'm okay with, I would I

[43:52] would ask to cut that part of it out

[43:56] that the amber ambassador program

[43:59] staffing and the ambassador program

[44:02] materials

[44:04] that that much of it and I think there's

[44:07] better uses for for our money than those two parts of this grant.

[44:15] Okay, thanks Mike. Any other discussion

[44:17] on that one? Nicole,

[44:20] >> after listening to what Mike said, maybe

[44:23] we should move on and like decide if we

[44:26] want to fund the rest and then come back

[44:27] to that one and if there is additional

[44:30] funding, maybe we can add to that one.

[44:32] But maybe kind of look at the other ones

[44:34] because I I hear what Mike's saying

[44:36] fully.

[44:39] >> Okay,

[44:42] that's fine. Any other questions or

[44:44] discussion on that one before we move

[44:45] on?

[44:47] >> Nicole, that's a good idea.

[44:50] >> Okay, let's come back to that one then.

[44:52] Um, next application is the Emory County

[44:55] signing crew equipment application 5649.

[45:00] Um,

[45:02] let's see. They're trying to get a side

[45:03] by side and a trailer to support their

[45:06] trail crew

[45:09] for Emery County.

[45:11] Uh Nicole, you had you've got comments.

[45:15] >> Yeah, I guess I'm full of words today.

[45:18] Um I'll just say I support this one. I

[45:21] think the last time it was signed I was

[45:23] a seasonal at the Forest Service and I

[45:25] don't want to tell you how long I've

[45:27] been at with the state. So it it's been

[45:30] a while. I kind of support this.

[45:34] » Okay. Thank you. Anybody else have any

[45:37] comments on this one?

[45:43] Okay, seeing none, let's go ahead and

[45:45] vote on this one. Um, we'll do roll

[45:47] call.

[45:49] Uh, let's do Brett.

[45:52] >> Yes.

[45:54] >> Brody,

[45:55] >> yes.

[45:56] >> Eric,

[45:58] >> yes.

[45:59] >> Uh, let's see. Mike,

[46:02] >> yes.

[46:03] >> Nicole,

[46:04] >> yes.

[46:06] >> Russ,

[46:07] >> yes. Scott.

[46:10] >> Yes. Yes.

[46:11] >> And I'll vote yes as well.

[46:17] » Okay. Uh, next application is the US

[46:20] Forest Service European Trail OV.

[46:25] Um,

[46:26] this is a San Pete Ranger District. It

[46:28] looks like they are looking to replace

[46:30] their

[46:32] side by side. Is that right?

[46:44] Thanks, Evan, for pulling that up.

[46:47] >> I thought it was an ATV they're

[46:49] replacing, but maybe I'm wrong.

[46:51] >> 50inch OV.

[46:53] >> I think it's a 50 inch side by side.

[46:57] >> Hey, Evan, who was the letter of support

[46:59] from? Can you pull those up?

[47:01] >> Of course. Let's see here.

[47:05] So, one from Snow

[47:06] >> Oh, sorry.

[47:08] >> No, I was say one from Snow College, one

[47:09] from San Peak County, and then one from

[47:11] the Rome West nonprofit

[47:15] >> and wasn't there a request from San Peak

[47:18] County for some sort of like trail dozer

[47:20] to do trail work that their county roads

[47:22] folks would be doing? Is that a

[47:24] different one than this?

[47:25] >> Yeah,

[47:27] >> okay.

[47:28] >> Um, I can if you guys would like my

[47:31] input. If not, Jason, tell me to shut

[47:33] up. But I worked with that ATV they're

[47:36] going to replace. This is money well

[47:38] spent. They uh trust me, I I know I know

[47:42] the machine they're replacing. I worked

[47:45] on it.

[47:48] » Okay. Any other discussion on this one?

[47:52] >> Wait, it probably was there when I was a

[47:54] seasonal, too.

[47:57] >> It probably was.

[48:00] Hey, this may be a longer question than

[48:02] we want to take on at the time, but why

[48:04] don't they just address that in their

[48:06] application?

[48:09] I mean, they never tell you how many

[48:11] pieces of equipment they have, what

[48:13] condition they're in, how much use

[48:15] they're going through. They just

[48:18] [clears throat] put in a request for

[48:19] another one. It's like, well, it' be

[48:21] nice to know where you're at on

[48:22] everything else.

[48:26] You you make a good point and and that's

[48:29] something I think that the council

[48:30] should consider too when um especially

[48:33] if you have competing ones and limited

[48:35] money who who articulates that need the

[48:37] best. You you're I think you hit it

[48:39] right on Russ.

[48:41] >> Yeah. They don't really give you enough

[48:43] for me to like weigh it out in my mind

[48:45] as far as prioritization for

[48:49] awards, but

[48:54] I don't know how we work with them to

[48:55] get things better written, more

[48:58] information in there. Um,

[49:00] >> they're telling me all these highlights

[49:01] about the trail, which, you know, I I'm

[49:03] familiar with or whatever. Like, just

[49:06] tell me when you're talking about a

[49:07] piece of equipment, tell me the ins and

[49:10] outs of what's around it and what's

[49:11] going on and what you need. Russ, that's

[49:14] uh that's valuable feedback and

[49:15] something that uh we may take you up on

[49:17] if you guys have some specific uh we

[49:19] will be sending out a survey after this

[49:21] scoring meeting and it you know we're

[49:22] always looking for feedback to give the

[49:24] applicants and that's like gold for

[49:25] them. So like if we can if you guys have

[49:27] some commentary on these projects that

[49:29] we can share with the with the

[49:30] applicants in the future and we do have

[49:32] some trainings coming up. Um you know

[49:34] that's like I said I think that'd be

[49:35] really really valuable for the

[49:36] applicants and would hopefully increase

[49:38] the the product that you guys are seeing

[49:39] a better high quality product.

[49:42] >> Yeah. felt like as I read through them

[49:44] like a lot of the equipment ones they're

[49:46] giving you a lot of trail commentary

[49:48] >> which is basically irrelevant. It's like

[49:51] give me the details on the equipment.

[49:54] So

[49:57] » yeah, just going to say on your grants

[49:59] tour that could be something that is

[50:01] shared as well.

[50:03] >> Absolutely.

[50:04] >> Especially as we're getting more and

[50:05] more applicants, more and more asks each

[50:08] cycle. um understanding that this will

[50:11] give you an edge up.

[50:16] Okay. Any other discussion on the for

[50:19] service application for

[50:21] >> I do have I do have one thing. Um Evan,

[50:24] can you pull up the uh bid on the side

[50:26] by side?

[50:28] >> Yes. Let's take a look at it.

[50:33] » You want to see the actual

[50:35] >> bid document? I'm not sure if I saw it.

[50:37] Um Um,

[50:41] maybe this is it. No,

[50:48] I'm not sure if we have an actual bid

[50:50] document. Um, I have the budget and that

[50:53] was the for the 18,000. So, I've noticed

[50:55] this on a couple of them that either

[50:58] their bid looks like it came off the

[51:00] internet off of like the manufacturer's

[51:02] website, not from a local dealer,

[51:05] >> or it was just kind of plain. Is that a

[51:08] common thing or am I missing something

[51:10] somewhere?

[51:13] So within the application itself um we

[51:16] do not have a specific requirement for

[51:18] that documentation but I can say that

[51:20] you know when it comes time for

[51:21] reimbursement they would absolutely have

[51:23] to provide us with that you know the

[51:25] invoice and the and the proof of payment

[51:26] and all that same same process that they

[51:28] would go through with with state

[51:29] funding. Um but you know if that's you

[51:32] know that's the kind of feedback we're

[51:33] looking for here like if that's

[51:34] something you guys want to see included

[51:35] in application. Seems like like on our

[51:37] other grants, they're always putting in

[51:38] bids from an actual dealer and not just

[51:41] off the website of the manufactur the national website where you just go

[51:47] in and, you know, build your machine on

[51:49] the website, but that's not really the

[51:51] actual cost. And so, unless I'm missing

[51:53] something, I I I just haven't been able

[51:55] to find actual bids from actual dealers,

[51:58] which kind of is odd to me on this on

[52:01] >> That's great feedback.

[52:03] Thanks. No, that's good feedback. if if

[52:05] that's something this this council

[52:06] thinks would be beneficial, we're more

[52:08] than happy to add a question to include

[52:09] specific bids or, you know, to actually

[52:11] have a bid document included as an

[52:13] attachment.

[52:16] >> Thanks, Brody. Cheryl, you've got your

[52:17] hand up.

[52:18] >> Yeah, I was just going to say we

[52:20] actually uh federal employees, we

[52:21] actually can't provide a bid because

[52:24] until we go out and put a contract

[52:26] package out and go out for bid, that

[52:29] kind of is all we can get. like we're

[52:31] not allowed to go outside of that

[52:33] contracting process and go get bids from

[52:35] like local vendors. However, once that

[52:38] contract package gets put out, that bid

[52:40] goes out and any vendors locally, they

[52:43] can, you know, obviously put in for

[52:46] that. And we also don't really ever know

[52:49] the total amount because again, it's all

[52:50] based off of the contract. So, just a

[52:52] little bit of FYI for the federal

[52:54] partners. Like that's probably the best

[52:57] they're going to be able to give because

[52:59] it's got to work through contracting.

[53:02] >> All right. That that's that's good to

[53:04] know that just this emery um this is a

[53:08] county government one and

[53:10] >> this one's

[53:10] >> I thought this was a Forest Service one,

[53:12] but just just so you know, people may

[53:14] have limitations like that where it's

[53:16] like, hey, this at least shows you we're

[53:18] in the ballpark of what this is going to

[53:19] cost. Sometimes the contracts come in

[53:21] less and sometimes they come over a

[53:23] little bit more. Um, just depending. So,

[53:26] just a little FYI.

[53:29] » Thanks, Jerome.

[53:32] >> Okay. Any more discussion on the US

[53:35] Forest Service European Trail OB?

[53:41] All right. Let's go ahead and vote.

[53:45] Let's go with Brody.

[53:48] >> Yes.

[53:50] Um, Eric,

[53:52] >> yes.

[53:53] >> Mike,

[53:54] >> yes.

[53:56] >> Nicole,

[53:57] >> yes.

[53:59] >> Russ,

[54:00] >> yes.

[54:01] >> Scott,

[54:03] >> yes.

[54:04] >> Brett,

[54:06] >> yes.

[54:07] >> And I'll vote yes as well on that one.

[54:12] » Okay. Uh, next one down the list is the

[54:15] Puffer Lake uh, Legacy Trail Head

[54:19] Project. This is in Beaver County. Uh,

[54:21] Beaver County is the applicant on this

[54:23] one. I'm looking for funds specifically

[54:27] for the trail head at Puffer Lake. Um, I

[54:31] remember looking at this project.

[54:32] They've got a very large budget because

[54:34] they're including all of the aspects of

[54:38] the uh improvements at Puffer Lake,

[54:40] including like a UD do shed and and

[54:42] other things there. But, um, it looked

[54:45] like this one was specifically for the

[54:47] trail head. That's what they're seeking

[54:49] the RTP funds for on this one. Um, any discussion? I'll open it up now. uh

[54:56] if you have any questions or comments

[54:58] about it.

[55:00] >> Yeah. A few years ago when we approved

[55:02] the purchase of this land, this was one

[55:04] of the requirements that we asked them

[55:06] to put into a grant in the future, some

[55:09] kind of trail head for winter access or

[55:12] parking for riding your vehicle on the

[55:14] mountain. So, they're just following up

[55:17] on what they agreed to in the past.

[55:22] >> Okay. Thanks, Dave. Any other comments

[55:24] or discussion? Cheryl, go ahead.

[55:27] >> Yeah, I reviewed this one and I'll be

[55:29] honest, it felt really confusing because

[55:31] they did expand the scope so wide

[55:33] because I was like I I don't understand

[55:35] necessarily, you know, what is part of

[55:38] the RTP project and what isn't. Um, so

[55:41] there's that. And then I I think the

[55:43] other part about this that makes me a

[55:45] little bit concerned that it's strictly

[55:47] on the motorized side is that they said

[55:49] in the future they're going to add a

[55:50] non-motorized trail that's going to

[55:52] leave from this motorized trail head as

[55:54] well. Um, which feels kind of

[55:56] interesting to me. Maybe it could be

[55:58] more of a split, but um, it just it's

[56:02] one of those things that looks like

[56:03] they're planning a non-motorized trail

[56:05] to leave out of there in the future.

[56:07] >> Yeah, I had the same thoughts, too. I It

[56:10] looked like there was certainly a a

[56:12] non-motorized aspect to it and also

[56:15] looked like access to the lake for

[56:18] English,

[56:19] >> which I'm guessing that parking lot's

[56:21] going to get a lot of that being that

[56:23] close to the lake. So, it to me it's

[56:25] just one of those confusing like how do

[56:27] we really make sure it provides OP trail

[56:30] head parking and how do you actually

[56:32] understand what's part of this grant

[56:34] because there's so many factors. Yeah.

[56:36] Uh sheds and all sorts of things that

[56:38] I'm like I I wish they would just keep

[56:40] it to whatever is in this grant both

[56:43] what the ask is and what the match is

[56:44] because otherwise it's very confusing.

[56:47] >> Yeah. Scott, you have your hand up. You

[56:51] know, initially I called them because

[56:53] the grant talked about a crusher that I

[56:55] think the RTP grant was directed at a

[56:58] crusher. They wanted to purchase a

[57:00] crutcher. And when I was talking to the the guy there, he finally went back

[57:06] and says, "Oh, they have changed their

[57:07] mind on." And I says, "Well, that's

[57:08] probably a good thing of changing their

[57:10] mind because I'm I'm not sure they want

[57:12] to buy a Crusher because it would maybe

[57:14] limit them what they could do with it.

[57:16] But I do have some issues of what's

[57:18] going on in here. And it is kind of

[57:21] confusing uh because they're they've

[57:24] pulled money from different different

[57:26] areas and it's hard for us to see where

[57:29] all that money is coming from if if it's

[57:31] OB money or if it's some other grant

[57:33] money and and that's true across some of

[57:36] these other grants that we're not maybe

[57:38] necessarily privy to or maybe it would

[57:40] take us time to dig into it to figure

[57:43] out what match and where they pulling it

[57:46] from and what ideas they have. But it

[57:49] appeared to me that this grant was

[57:51] directly for the crusher. So if they've

[57:53] changed that, what have they changed it

[57:56] to? Are they just going to buy the

[57:57] aggregate? Are they going to rent the

[57:59] crusher? Uh I don't know.

[58:03] >> Okay. Thanks, Scott. Uh Marine,

[58:07] >> yeah, do has quite a few contracts for

[58:10] um with Beaver County for this property

[58:13] and um we're currently trying to get

[58:16] them to complete a master plan so that

[58:19] we're not peacemealing items. Um, so I

[58:23] would, yeah, I would recommend, yeah,

[58:26] talking this through and, um, I just

[58:29] wanted to give you guys that background

[58:31] that we're still kind of waiting so that

[58:33] they're not asking for lots of things

[58:34] that in the end might have to be changed

[58:36] out.

[58:38] Okay,

[58:40] >> Brody,

[58:41] >> in just listening to some of the people

[58:44] in Beaver County without telling them

[58:47] about this, uh, they get the impression

[58:49] that Beaver County is just throwing

[58:51] things against the wall and seeing

[58:52] what's sticking. Um, and so I just

[58:56] listened and they just talked. And, uh,

[59:00] there's a lot of concern about this. uh

[59:04] they know that it's going to have to

[59:05] happen at some point, but they're they're just kind of confused

[59:10] about how it was put together, the whole

[59:12] entire everything from the very very

[59:14] beginning of the Puffer Lake purchase to

[59:17] now. So, I don't know. I wonder if we

[59:20] can maybe even hold off on this one till

[59:23] they get their other stuff in order like

[59:26] what Meen was saying. So, something to

[59:28] think about.

[59:30] >> Okay. Thanks, Brody. And one of the

[59:31] things that I noticed as well is that

[59:33] they did not have any OV groups listed

[59:36] as their partners or in their

[59:39] >> that's that was one of the other

[59:42] frustrating things with the uh the club

[59:45] there is they were caught blindsided

[59:47] several times by this. They're not sure

[59:51] if they've angered the county commission

[59:54] or what, but they they they just feel

[59:57] blindsided by this all of this.

[1:00:01] Brodia. Um I've heard that same from the

[1:00:05] local OB users as well. You know,

[1:00:08] they're coming to us for um for money,

[1:00:12] for OV money, and they just have not

[1:00:16] included the local OV group in this like

[1:00:18] I feel they should. Um and and they have

[1:00:22] a very solid group there that's very

[1:00:24] actively engaged with the Forest Service

[1:00:27] and other public land users there.

[1:00:31] >> Well, and and they they they even so far

[1:00:33] as have their own trail equipment that club actually owns uh and and they

[1:00:40] use with the Forest Service permission

[1:00:42] to to go out and do stuff. And so

[1:00:44] they've been they they do feel a little

[1:00:48] let down by the county to some extent.

[1:00:51] Um

[1:00:53] and and so yeah, I yeah and and they and

[1:00:56] they would be the ones probably doing a

[1:00:58] lot of the uh that come the county's

[1:01:00] going to come to them asking for uh

[1:01:02] manpower and things like that. And so

[1:01:04] they're just little little bit

[1:01:06] frustrated. I'd recommend that we hold

[1:01:08] off on this one. give them some time to

[1:01:10] get their ducks in a row and and relook

[1:01:12] at it the next time around.

[1:01:16] >> Okay. Thanks, Brody. Scott, you've got

[1:01:18] your hand up.

[1:01:19] >> Yes, I do. I find it interesting a year

[1:01:21] and a half ago when we funded the that

[1:01:24] $800,000 for Puppet Lake Prep Lake. The

[1:01:27] one question I had is who owns the land

[1:01:29] underneath the water and that is still

[1:01:32] not known. They haven't figured that out

[1:01:35] yet, which I find it kind of intriguing.

[1:01:41] Thanks, Scott. Cheryl, you've got your

[1:01:43] hand up.

[1:01:44] >> Yeah, I was just gonna say I agree with

[1:01:46] Brody because again, I think my hardest

[1:01:48] part is there's so many things going on

[1:01:49] here, I can't even tell what the actual

[1:01:52] RT project ask is and what the match is.

[1:01:55] So I I would love it to be actually

[1:01:58] toned down to like if it's the trail

[1:02:00] head then to me all the matching

[1:02:01] components should be the trail head not

[1:02:04] a shed and you know fences like all

[1:02:07] these other things that are in that

[1:02:09] whole general area like yeah their match

[1:02:11] looks amazing but I just I agree with

[1:02:15] Brody. I think it needs some refinement.

[1:02:18] >> Thanks Cheryl. Mike you've got your hand

[1:02:20] up.

[1:02:21] Yeah,

[1:02:23] especially after listening to comments,

[1:02:26] I noticed a little bit with that crusher

[1:02:28] too with Scott that they were going to

[1:02:31] crush a bunch and then I'm just like,

[1:02:33] wait, we're paying to crush all this

[1:02:36] dirt and they're going to put some of it

[1:02:37] on the

[1:02:39] >> When is the next RTP cycle? Is it next

[1:02:42] year or is it sooner? What are we

[1:02:44] looking at?

[1:02:45] >> It's next year. Yep.

[1:02:47] >> So, that would give them time to really

[1:02:49] work with you. and also with Rachel on anything that on the other side could

[1:02:54] help with and uh and make this

[1:02:57] worthwhile the because the project at

[1:02:59] the end of the day is going to be a

[1:03:01] wonderful project when it's all said and

[1:03:03] done. It'll be nice. The OP community

[1:03:06] will love it. Everybody else will love

[1:03:08] it, too. but uh just to a chance to to

[1:03:11] do it a little bit better and a

[1:03:14] requirement that they get those letters

[1:03:16] of support from the local users uh that

[1:03:19] are going to be asked to do some

[1:03:21] backbreaking work.

[1:03:25] >> Thanks, Brody. Nicole, you got your hand

[1:03:26] up.

[1:03:27] >> Yeah, just a little bit of a devil's

[1:03:29] advocate. It's been a while since I've

[1:03:31] been up to Puffer Lake and some of that

[1:03:34] area. Last time I was up there a few

[1:03:36] years ago, it was getting pretty busy.

[1:03:38] If we're holding off a year, are we

[1:03:41] creating problems up in this area? And I

[1:03:44] guess that's maybe more of a a Brody and

[1:03:47] others in that area question.

[1:03:51] » I I I think they'll survive. They've got

[1:03:54] other fish to fry with that project up

[1:03:57] there that they could be working on. Um,

[1:04:00] and so, uh, one of the concerns that,

[1:04:03] like the local club has is they were

[1:04:07] supposed to come up with an agreement

[1:04:09] between the county commission and UD do

[1:04:11] andor the highway patrol to to permit

[1:04:15] people to actually go up the pavements

[1:04:18] without being harassed by the highway

[1:04:19] patrol, which, you know, bless their

[1:04:22] hearts, that's what they're supposed to

[1:04:23] be doing. But uh um they're supposed to

[1:04:26] pattern that agreement after Iron County

[1:04:28] from Peroan to Brian Head where the

[1:04:30] highway patrol backs off on uh citing

[1:04:34] people where uh um but they they've yet

[1:04:38] to do that. And so it's a little bit of

[1:04:40] a frustration with the local club that there's it'd be a great thing at

[1:04:46] some point, but they've got a lot of lot

[1:04:47] of things they've got to complete first.

[1:04:50] So I I think they'll be fine.

[1:04:52] >> Thanks, Brody. Dave, go ahead.

[1:05:02] » David, you've got your hand up.

[1:05:07] » Can you hear me?

[1:05:08] >> Yes. Now we can.

[1:05:09] >> Now we can.

[1:05:10] >> Yeah. The biggest user group that'll

[1:05:12] impact if you don't do it this year is

[1:05:13] snowmoilers. There's nowhere really to

[1:05:16] park at the end of that road in the

[1:05:17] winter. So, if this parking lot's in

[1:05:19] place before winter this year, there'll

[1:05:21] be a place for snowmobile snowmoilers to

[1:05:23] park. So,

[1:05:27] >> well, if if next winter is like this

[1:05:29] winter, there won't be snowmmoiling

[1:05:32] or or anything.

[1:05:38] » Yeah. And we may even recommend to or

[1:05:40] ask that you recommend that they come to

[1:05:42] the first round of the overfunding

[1:05:44] um as a possibility too if they get

[1:05:47] these things figured out.

[1:05:52] Okay. Um

[1:05:55] so

[1:05:57] let's uh I guess on that one let's just

[1:05:59] go ahead and uh vote uh well I'll accept

[1:06:04] a motion to uh table this one.

[1:06:09] If somebody wants,

[1:06:11] >> don't we have to vote on that to just

[1:06:12] say no?

[1:06:13] >> We could just vote on it and say no or

[1:06:15] we can just table it and not vote on it.

[1:06:19] >> Can we do that?

[1:06:22] >> Rachel,

[1:06:24] >> I would recommend that you do not table

[1:06:26] this. that you can

[1:06:30] you don't have to vote on it, but don't

[1:06:32] table it because if you table it, we'll

[1:06:33] have to bring it up next grant meeting

[1:06:36] to discuss it.

[1:06:37] >> Okay, let's vote on it then.

[1:06:42] Uh let's see. We'll start with uh Eric.

[1:06:48] >> No,

[1:06:50] Kurt. Uh sorry, Mike.

[1:06:53] No. Nicole,

[1:06:56] >> I'm I'm kind of on the fence, but I'm gonna go with no.

[1:07:00] >> Russ,

[1:07:02] >> I'll go with no.

[1:07:04] >> Scott,

[1:07:07] » no.

[1:07:09] >> Brett,

[1:07:10] >> no.

[1:07:13] >> And then did I hit Eric, right?

[1:07:19] Oh, Brody. Brody's next.

[1:07:21] >> No.

[1:07:22] >> Okay. and then I'll vote no as well.

[1:07:26] Okay, moving on to the next one down.

[1:07:30] This is the European Trail Dozer. This

[1:07:32] is one that Nicole, you were asking

[1:07:34] about for San Pete County. So, uh, Mike,

[1:07:39] you've got your hand up.

[1:07:41] >> Yeah, I was wondering if we could kind

[1:07:43] of move this one down to the bottom of

[1:07:44] the list, too. Um uh my decision on how

[1:07:49] much to fund it would kind of depend a

[1:07:51] little bit on what's left too.

[1:07:55] Okay.

[1:07:59] Anybody else opposed to that?

[1:08:01] >> I would support Mike's suggestion.

[1:08:05] >> Okay. We'll come back to that one then.

[1:08:08] Um next one after that one is the uh

[1:08:11] signage project for the Monosel BLM.

[1:08:14] Um it looks like they're looking to get

[1:08:16] a side byside to go on their trails and

[1:08:19] do some signing. Um any discussion on

[1:08:22] this one that

[1:08:24] or any questions you guys have.

[1:08:37] Okay. Well, let's go ahead and vote on

[1:08:39] it then. If we uh if we don't have any

[1:08:41] comments or questions,

[1:08:44] um we'll start with Mike.

[1:08:51] >> Yes.

[1:08:53] >> Nicole,

[1:08:54] >> yes.

[1:08:56] >> Russ,

[1:08:58] >> yes.

[1:08:59] >> Scott,

[1:09:02] >> yes.

[1:09:03] >> Brett,

[1:09:06] » yes. Brody,

[1:09:09] >> yes.

[1:09:11] >> Eric,

[1:09:12] >> yes.

[1:09:13] >> And I'll vote yes as well on that one.

[1:09:17] >> Okay, next one on the list is the

[1:09:21] science certified guide trading program

[1:09:25] um from Science Moab. This was an

[1:09:28] education

[1:09:30] request. Um

[1:09:34] any comments or questions on this one?

[1:09:38] Go ahead, Nicole.

[1:09:40] >> I'm not sure if I understood this one

[1:09:43] correctly or not, but it seems to me

[1:09:46] like they're developing their own

[1:09:47] certified program, which also almost

[1:09:51] seems like you could do this as a

[1:09:53] business yourself and not like you you

[1:09:56] it could be like a business that

[1:09:58] somebody starts and provides and you

[1:10:00] know, guides could purchase the service

[1:10:02] and have their certification. So, I'm

[1:10:04] not sure it's something that's like a

[1:10:07] grant should fund or not. And maybe I

[1:10:09] misread it, but yeah, it just this seems

[1:10:12] like a business and not really a like a

[1:10:15] business venture and not really what

[1:10:18] this grants for, but I could be wrong.

[1:10:21] >> Okay, thank you, Nicole. Uh, Brody,

[1:10:23] you've got your hand up. Um, and again,

[1:10:26] I could be wrong, too, but they they

[1:10:28] mentioned a couple of times about

[1:10:30] for-profit paperhead.

[1:10:33] Um,

[1:10:35] and and correct me if I'm wrong, but

[1:10:38] have we funded a a a business before?

[1:10:42] um cuz they're not that just seems like

[1:10:46] we haven't because we're funding

[1:10:47] federal, county, state, municipality,

[1:10:50] 501c3s

[1:10:52] and all of a sudden they're mentioning

[1:10:54] paperhead and for profits things like

[1:10:57] that and uh and so or am I reading that

[1:11:00] wrong?

[1:11:00] >> From an elig from an eligibility

[1:11:03] perspective, we would want to see that

[1:11:04] they are a 501c3. So if that's something

[1:11:07] that you guys have picked up in your

[1:11:08] review, that would very likely

[1:11:10] disqualify them.

[1:11:12] Sounds like Brody and I read it very

[1:11:14] similarly.

[1:11:16] >> Yeah, I I I mean unless somebody else

[1:11:19] knows able to determine that they have a 501c3.

[1:11:25] Uh but I mean the idea is nice, get

[1:11:28] people out there to learn about the

[1:11:30] geology and the history and whatever

[1:11:32] else, but uh if they're actually

[1:11:34] charging people to do that, that's uh

[1:11:37] that's I think that takes us down a

[1:11:39] different path that we don't go down.

[1:11:44] » Okay, Mike, you've got your hand up.

[1:11:47] >> Yeah, right in my notes, it says,

[1:11:50] "Sounds like a consulting business.

[1:11:52] Shouldn't fund a business." Um, I'd have

[1:11:55] a hard time justifying funding this to

[1:11:57] the motorized users if I um, you know, I just don't think I could justify look

[1:12:05] at the regist look at the users and say,

[1:12:09] "Yeah, we funded this and it was a good

[1:12:11] use of the money." So, I I I agree with

[1:12:16] Brody and Nicole.

[1:12:19] So,

[1:12:20] >> thanks. Thanks, Mike. Marine, you've got

[1:12:22] your hand up.

[1:12:23] Yeah, looking at their W9, it's listed

[1:12:25] as a CC Corp, so it's not identified as

[1:12:29] a 501c3.

[1:12:32] >> Okay, thank you.

[1:12:33] >> Thanks, Marine.

[1:12:37] » Okay, well, that's an eligible.

[1:12:40] >> Easy enough.

[1:12:44] Okay. Uh, I don't think we even need to

[1:12:46] vote on that one, do we?

[1:12:52] Okay, let's go on to the next one down

[1:12:53] the list. This is the OV trail equipment

[1:12:57] for Garfield County. This is their road

[1:12:59] grader. They're looking to purchase to

[1:13:03] maintain class D roads that serve as

[1:13:05] primary OV travel corridors.

[1:13:08] >> Where do we stand at on the the balance

[1:13:10] right now before we talk about it?

[1:13:13] >> Yeah, let me pull up real quick. So,

[1:13:14] right now we have a balance of 393,000,

[1:13:16] but let me just kind of show you the

[1:13:18] distribution right now.

[1:13:21] Make sure it's refreshed.

[1:13:25] So,

[1:13:28] just to kind of give you guys an idea,

[1:13:29] looks like about 300,000 of that has

[1:13:31] gone to maintenance projects. Um 198,000

[1:13:35] to equipment.

[1:13:37] Then that also got picked up as

[1:13:38] equipment. So, uh, yeah, that's the

[1:13:40] rundown.

[1:13:43] Again, that leaves us a balance of

[1:13:45] 393,750.

[1:13:50] Okay. And there's four applications

[1:13:52] left.

[1:13:56] Okay. Dave, you've got your hand up.

[1:14:00] Yeah, I think we talked about this in

[1:14:01] OVR, but just concerned that they're

[1:14:05] blading or wanting to blade roads that

[1:14:07] are, you know, through track and a style

[1:14:10] that's unique and really experience that

[1:14:14] a lot riders are looking for. Not

[1:14:17] necessarily against buying a piece of

[1:14:18] equipment, just changing the character

[1:14:20] of a lot of roads that a lot of people

[1:14:22] like to ride.

[1:14:25] » Okay, thanks Dave. Mike, you've got your

[1:14:27] hand up.

[1:14:29] Um yeah, two questions. Uh one is how

[1:14:34] many how many more ass do we have? Uh

[1:14:37] you know we have the 393,000 but how

[1:14:40] much how much is left how many ass

[1:14:44] do we have?

[1:14:45] >> So we have two more projects that we

[1:14:47] have not discussed and then you still

[1:14:49] have the um Utah Avalanche Center

[1:14:52] project and the Monosella BLM were two

[1:14:55] projects that I believe you moved on

[1:14:56] from.

[1:15:00] Um,

[1:15:02] I don't know. I have super mixed

[1:15:05] feelings about this one. Uh, I I second

[1:15:08] the I really don't like the idea of just

[1:15:11] dropping the blade on 400 miles of two

[1:15:13] tracks. Um, but I did talk to

[1:15:18] uh Garfield County and and they do have

[1:15:24] um,

[1:15:26] you know, it's kind of a I I don't know.

[1:15:29] I I talked to him and it changed my view

[1:15:32] a little bit, but but I don't know

[1:15:35] whether,

[1:15:37] you know, if I could get some guarantee

[1:15:38] that they wouldn't just drop the blade

[1:15:40] and blade 400 miles of two tracks, if

[1:15:43] they would just kind of just clean them

[1:15:46] up a little bit here and there and and

[1:15:48] make them passable,

[1:15:50] uh, then then I would be more likely to

[1:15:54] say yes. But it does I do have a little

[1:15:57] concern about just changing the aspect

[1:15:59] of 400 miles of trails.

[1:16:07] » Cheryl, you've got your hand up.

[1:16:10] >> Yeah. I guess my question with this one

[1:16:12] is I don't think we the council voted to

[1:16:15] move forward their overrant ask which

[1:16:17] was 145,000 of their of the ask of the

[1:16:22] matching needed to make this purchase

[1:16:24] anyways. So I guess is that accurate

[1:16:28] that we did the council did not move

[1:16:29] that forward because if so then I think

[1:16:31] they're 150 $145,000 short of even being

[1:16:34] able to buy this equipment.

[1:16:37] >> That's correct.

[1:16:40] Scott, you've got your hand up.

[1:16:42] >> Yes, I do. Um, uh,

[1:16:47] there's these two pieces of equipment,

[1:16:48] this greater and the cat, that I have

[1:16:50] concerns about. I I'm wondering if we

[1:16:54] need to put a a small committee

[1:16:57] together, two or three people to

[1:16:59] actually go talk with them, have them

[1:17:02] show us why they need these big pieces

[1:17:05] of equipment and maybe we can have some

[1:17:09] adjustment and, you know, maybe they can

[1:17:11] convince us what the need is because

[1:17:13] right now I I have concerns. I I had a

[1:17:16] conversation with a a longtime employee

[1:17:19] of the Forest Service today that's

[1:17:21] worked for the BLM for several years and

[1:17:23] for the Forest Service for several years

[1:17:25] and they have concerns about these

[1:17:27] bigger pieces of equipment being used on

[1:17:29] trails. Uh and Mike and I have talked a

[1:17:33] little teensy bit about it that maybe

[1:17:37] [snorts] these aren't the best for what

[1:17:39] we want to use them for. Uh, and they're

[1:17:42] probably going to get used for something

[1:17:44] else than what we intended them to be

[1:17:47] used for. So, uh, I don't want to not

[1:17:50] fund them because I've had conversations

[1:17:53] with them and they talk about all the routes that they need to work on,

[1:17:58] but I do have heartburn on these big

[1:18:01] pieces of equipment. That bulldozer has

[1:18:04] 110inch wide blade. Uh the the road

[1:18:07] grader is over eight feet wide by

[1:18:10] itself. Uh so

[1:18:15] I don't know I don't know Evan if that's

[1:18:17] possible to to say okay

[1:18:20] we can fund them uh after we go down and

[1:18:24] talk to them. that that's

[1:18:28] it's always been good when I went and

[1:18:30] went on the ground and talked with them

[1:18:32] and have them show me what they're going

[1:18:34] to be doing and and maybe they can

[1:18:35] convince me or maybe perhaps we'll

[1:18:38] convince them that they don't need this

[1:18:40] piece of equipment.

[1:18:44] » Thanks on that what I had to say.

[1:18:48] Well, and something else that I was

[1:18:50] thinking with this too is if this is

[1:18:52] just to do or to to get the roads or

[1:18:56] access up to snuff, um, does it need to

[1:19:00] be a full purchase of equipment or could

[1:19:02] it be just a lease for a summer that

[1:19:04] they can go do the work and then it's

[1:19:05] fixed for a while and spend

[1:19:07] substantially less money than what is

[1:19:10] needed? But to your point, Scott, I

[1:19:13] mean, if they own the equipment, they're

[1:19:15] going to use it for more than just

[1:19:16] trails. They're going to use it for

[1:19:18] anything they can. And part of part of

[1:19:21] the other one, too, is they were using

[1:19:23] B-roll funds to help purchase it as

[1:19:25] their match. So, you know, they're

[1:19:28] obviously going to be using it on B-ros,

[1:19:30] too. And how much of it is going to be

[1:19:33] used for the trails versus how much the

[1:19:35] roads, it's not very clear on either of

[1:19:38] these.

[1:19:39] Yeah. And just to address um the lack of

[1:19:42] match and I think you just spoke to it

[1:19:44] Jason um they do have a match beyond

[1:19:47] that that over pending grant. So as you

[1:19:51] just noted there's 115,000 coming from

[1:19:52] their B roads fund. So thank you

[1:19:56] >> Nicole. You've got your hand up.

[1:19:59] >> Yeah. I think the the part for me on

[1:20:01] this one is like and I I think maybe we

[1:20:04] all kind of have the same idea in our

[1:20:06] head is when I think class D I think

[1:20:07] like kind of a twotrack road, but not

[1:20:10] all class D's are twotrack roads. Some

[1:20:13] of them are, you know, it's just kind of

[1:20:15] how a county designates them. And so

[1:20:18] some of them are actually roads that do

[1:20:20] get maintained pretty regularly and are

[1:20:22] used pretty frequently. And so I think

[1:20:24] that's kind of for me like yeah I think

[1:20:27] there is a need especially because a lot

[1:20:29] of these D-Roads provide access to other

[1:20:32] you know other areas. So for me I'm I'm

[1:20:35] kind of in on this because yeah class

[1:20:39] D's are not all created equally.

[1:20:44] Some of the discussion I had with uh

[1:20:47] Garfield County is that uh a lot of this

[1:20:50] was going to be done on Forest Service

[1:20:52] ground and that the class two roads up

[1:20:54] there uh that they say that the BLM I

[1:20:58] mean the bill and the forest service are

[1:21:00] unable or can't afford to to to clean

[1:21:02] these routes up and these these roads or

[1:21:06] access routes are some they sit kind of

[1:21:09] in the middle of no man's land. uh and they need to be maintained. Uh I I'm

[1:21:16] not against that. I just I guess I I

[1:21:18] need to almost be on the ground to see

[1:21:20] what they're going to do and say, "Okay,

[1:21:22] I I I'm okay with what you're doing." I

[1:21:25] got the impression from Garfield County

[1:21:27] that if they didn't get funding, they

[1:21:30] would still try to pursue getting this

[1:21:33] road graater.

[1:21:35] Uh, and so I I don't know if it'd be the

[1:21:38] same with the the bulldozer, but I I

[1:21:41] just I need to see what they're going to

[1:21:44] use it for.

[1:21:48] » Yeah, I I visited with them also and and

[1:21:51] in their pictures, they have a before

[1:21:53] and after. And the before is a two

[1:21:57] track, you know, obviously it's got some

[1:21:59] whoops in it and everything. And after's

[1:22:01] a graded road, you know, and I mean,

[1:22:05] we're talking a 12T blade on this thing,

[1:22:08] you know, even sideways, you're going to

[1:22:09] have 10 ft wide, which which isn't too

[1:22:12] wide, but but if you're trying to get a

[1:22:15] 12T I mean, most of the forest roads

[1:22:17] that I think of, you can't get a grater

[1:22:20] down them because the trees are too

[1:22:22] tight, you know. Um, and so, yeah,

[1:22:26] that's my concern. And he said, he said,

[1:22:28] "Well, that road goes to a trail head

[1:22:30] and people need to be able to get to the

[1:22:32] trail head." And and in that instance, I

[1:22:35] would totally be okay. Yeah. You know,

[1:22:39] the road to a trail head should be

[1:22:40] pretty good. But if you just run right

[1:22:44] over the trail head and grade the trail

[1:22:46] behind it, then then it's taken away

[1:22:49] from the experience. And so yeah, I just

[1:22:53] um I have a I have some heart burn with

[1:22:58] just kind of goes back to the it may

[1:23:01] improve the experience for one people

[1:23:04] one person but take it away from a lot

[1:23:06] of other people, you know, and so um uh

[1:23:10] I just I just have a little heartburn

[1:23:14] about having them

[1:23:17] um

[1:23:19] having them just, you know, and 400

[1:23:22] miles of road's a lot of road, you know,

[1:23:24] to where they could probably get a

[1:23:27] little smaller piece of equipment and

[1:23:29] spot maintain, fix the real bad spots,

[1:23:32] and um move through it. So,

[1:23:38] >> Cheryl, go ahead.

[1:23:40] >> Yeah, I put this in the chat as well. I

[1:23:42] think my comment wasn't so much about

[1:23:44] them not being able to make the match as

[1:23:46] it it was can they even afford the piece

[1:23:48] of equipment if they don't have that

[1:23:50] $145,000 of over because it looks like

[1:23:53] it's a $460,000 piece of equipment from

[1:23:56] their budget.

[1:23:58] So I don't know if they could come up

[1:23:59] with that other 145 or not but that was

[1:24:02] more my question not so much the

[1:24:04] matching.

[1:24:05] Well, the next suggestion I had if they

[1:24:07] were going to go this route and be able

[1:24:08] to get that is maybe apply for the next

[1:24:10] round of over to uh get the the rest of

[1:24:14] the money they need on it and indeed if

[1:24:16] they need this piece of equipment and I

[1:24:19] there the guy I talked to down there was

[1:24:23] really says we really really need this

[1:24:26] piece of equipment and I uh so

[1:24:33] go ahead Nicole.

[1:24:34] I kind of think like like Scott just

[1:24:36] said like I do think that you know there

[1:24:39] is a need for it. I think the county

[1:24:41] could use it and I do think it would be

[1:24:44] used wisely.

[1:24:52] » Okay.

[1:24:54] Well, let's let's go ahead and vote on

[1:24:55] this one then.

[1:25:00] Um let's start with

[1:25:03] Mike.

[1:25:06] >> Dang. I was hoping you wouldn't be um

[1:25:09] Oh, I have heart,

[1:25:15] » you know.

[1:25:15] >> Hey, Jason. Jason, before we vote on it,

[1:25:18] can we talk just a tad bit more about

[1:25:21] it? I I I I I think if somehow we were

[1:25:25] able to go sit down and talk with him

[1:25:28] and have him show us

[1:25:30] and I don't know how much that would

[1:25:32] complicate this whole process, but can

[1:25:34] we say, "Hey, we'll fund it." Uh after

[1:25:38] we go, let's say we just hold the

[1:25:40] funding out there and say, "But we need

[1:25:42] to come down and see what you're going

[1:25:44] to do and have some commitments from you

[1:25:46] of what you're going to do and not do

[1:25:48] with it.

[1:25:53] Yeah, I'll just say like to me this

[1:25:54] application is missing a lot of

[1:25:56] information.

[1:25:58] You want to blade some roads, you better

[1:26:00] declare which roads you want to blade

[1:26:05] and not just simply by the class. Like

[1:26:07] you need to really identify some miles

[1:26:10] and put those on a map.

[1:26:14] » Yeah, that's that's helpful. Thanks. Uh

[1:26:17] Nicole, you've got your hand up.

[1:26:19] I mean, just kind of going off of what

[1:26:21] Scott just said. I mean, could we just

[1:26:23] write in if we approve this, write in

[1:26:27] that, you know, a little a few

[1:26:29] stipulations, you know, like I I don't

[1:26:33] know any good ones off the top of my

[1:26:35] head, but, you know, don't you know,

[1:26:37] improve the roads beyond, you know, X

[1:26:41] width and, you know, just a few criteria

[1:26:44] to kind of help the county understand

[1:26:46] the way that this this committee would

[1:26:48] like that equipment to be used and

[1:26:50] considered,

[1:26:51] But and and to your point, um both you

[1:26:55] and Scott, I think at this point, if

[1:26:58] they're not prepared with that

[1:26:59] information, they're not quite prepared

[1:27:01] to make a solid

[1:27:04] application. Um

[1:27:07] and and it's come back next time type of

[1:27:09] a thing in in my opinion. Um, I just uh

[1:27:15] and and kind of to Russ's point that if

[1:27:18] they don't have good information, we've

[1:27:20] seen really good applications in the

[1:27:22] past where they identify specific trail

[1:27:25] problems that they've inventoried,

[1:27:27] they've identified the routes that

[1:27:29] they're going to fix and how that

[1:27:32] equipment is going to be used to fix

[1:27:33] them. Um, and they don't have that here.

[1:27:36] They just have this is a bunch of roads

[1:27:39] that are are critical paths and so there

[1:27:44] there's some holes in this one and they

[1:27:46] may just not be prepared as prepared as

[1:27:49] we need them to be and if we're having

[1:27:51] to go back and forth with them. Maybe

[1:27:55] it's the back and forth and then come

[1:27:57] back next time and and let's talk about

[1:27:59] it.

[1:28:03] Um Dave, you had your hand up. Did you

[1:28:05] have any

[1:28:07] >> Oh, you touched on what I was going to

[1:28:08] bring up. I know there's a feeling that

[1:28:11] they don't need to have NEPA uh because

[1:28:13] they own the county class B roads

[1:28:16] because they're RS2477.

[1:28:18] Um I don't know if the BLM and the

[1:28:20] Forest Service necess feel that way as

[1:28:24] well. So just just a thought that was in

[1:28:28] their grant.

[1:28:33] Yeah, there's there's probably

[1:28:36] definitely a difference of opinions on

[1:28:38] that.

[1:28:40] You know, Flipco might even have a

[1:28:42] differing opinion than the BLM on that.

[1:28:44] So,

[1:28:46] we do have some uh court findings

[1:28:50] recently.

[1:28:53] » Well, and and this is a equipment

[1:28:55] purchase. It's not necessarily a

[1:28:59] but yeah again to your point like where

[1:29:02] are they actually going to be using this

[1:29:03] and we don't know that other than

[1:29:05] they've got a a large spiderweb

[1:29:09] of the whole county. So

[1:29:14] okay any other discussion on this one.

[1:29:21] All right, let's go back and uh take it

[1:29:24] back to Mike.

[1:29:26] >> Yeah, I I just not too comfortable with

[1:29:30] it. And and if and let me just re the

[1:29:34] money if there's extra money, it will

[1:29:36] stay in the motorized RTP fund, right,

[1:29:41] » Evan?

[1:29:42] >> I apologize. I was responding to a text

[1:29:44] from a from a a council member. Um can

[1:29:46] you say that again? If if there's extra

[1:29:49] money left over, it will stay in the

[1:29:50] motorized RTP fund, right?

[1:29:53] >> That's correct.

[1:29:53] >> Okay. Yeah. I'm I'm gonna have to say

[1:29:56] no.

[1:29:57] >> Okay. Nicole,

[1:29:59] >> yes.

[1:30:01] >> Russ,

[1:30:02] >> no.

[1:30:05] >> Scott.

[1:30:06] >> Uh, yes.

[1:30:08] >> Brett,

[1:30:14] is Brett still on?

[1:30:17] Yeah. Uh, no.

[1:30:20] >> Okay. Brody,

[1:30:22] >> yes.

[1:30:25] >> Uh, and then Eric,

[1:30:28] >> yes.

[1:30:30] >> And then me, I'm going to say no.

[1:30:35] >> So, where does that put us on funding

[1:30:37] it?

[1:30:38] >> I think that puts you at a tie.

[1:30:41] >> Dr.

[1:30:44] I don't know. I I was holding out my

[1:30:45] fingers as you were counting. I'm glad

[1:30:47] go past five.

[1:30:48] >> So you might have the numbers for us

[1:30:50] here.

[1:30:50] >> You're right, Wade. It is a tie.

[1:30:53] >> Well, thank you, Marine. I'm glad my

[1:30:55] fingers were wrong.

[1:30:57] >> I was just counting. I was going, you

[1:30:59] got

[1:31:00] >> I'll change my note to two nos.

[1:31:02] [laughter]

[1:31:03] >> I don't I'm not sure if I can do that.

[1:31:08] » Okay. Well, how do we handle a

[1:31:10] tiebreaker?

[1:31:15] Um I I think Evan jumped in, but I think

[1:31:18] you could open it up for some more

[1:31:20] discussion and where it's a tiebreaker,

[1:31:23] you could vote a second time if there's

[1:31:26] any additional discussion after you

[1:31:29] voted.

[1:31:30] >> Is it that or is it does it need to be a

[1:31:32] majority vote

[1:31:35] to fund it?

[1:31:37] >> Is there a caveat that could convince

[1:31:39] one of us to change our minds?

[1:31:45] I guess that is a good question. I I

[1:31:48] would ask on those of you that said no,

[1:31:51] like are there things that would make

[1:31:54] you feel more comfortable? And I guess

[1:31:56] you could ask the same question of us

[1:31:58] that said yes.

[1:32:01] >> I would I would throw in just a a two

[1:32:03] cents about Garfield. They are very pro-

[1:32:06] O. They are on part of the front line

[1:32:09] with RS2477.

[1:32:12] Um they have a wide span as some of you

[1:32:16] may know they go in fact they're

[1:32:18] probably one of the longest

[1:32:22] well

[1:32:23] they maintain a lot of roads on the

[1:32:28] other side of Lake Pal that people don't

[1:32:30] realize that Garfield County stretches

[1:32:32] over and borders Wayne County clear on

[1:32:35] the very eastern edge of the state. So,

[1:32:41] just some thought.

[1:32:44] >> Well, if there's anything I can speak

[1:32:46] slightly to here, it's the fact um that

[1:32:47] they this was a an application that they

[1:32:50] moved over from uh the over grant cycle

[1:32:53] very quickly. So, you know, any of those

[1:32:55] kind of questions that maybe weren't as

[1:32:58] uh detailed as you might typically want

[1:32:59] to see, I I will say I think they

[1:33:01] completed their application in one day.

[1:33:03] Um you know, and I don't know if that

[1:33:04] speaks to preparation or not, but it was

[1:33:06] moved over from from over very quickly.

[1:33:10] I guess Nicole, to answer your question

[1:33:12] for me, that that said no, if they if

[1:33:16] they leased for a year and reduced the

[1:33:18] amount they were asking, I'd probably be

[1:33:19] okay with it because to me that shows

[1:33:21] that they're they're just going to go in

[1:33:23] and fix these problems and then um

[1:33:28] and then basic it seemed like the

[1:33:30] problem is is these access roads to the

[1:33:33] trail heads. Um,

[1:33:36] and another thing for me is, um,

[1:33:41] maintaining roads, two trail heads. That seems like those should be

[1:33:45] maintained roads, not necessarily a

[1:33:47] trail by themselves. So,

[1:33:51] um, but I I do want to help the

[1:33:55] community. I don't know these roads

[1:33:57] exactly, and I don't know what they are

[1:34:00] trying to do specifically. They say that

[1:34:02] they're critical routes. Um, and if it

[1:34:05] is that critical, let's get them fixed.

[1:34:07] But I don't think we necessarily need to

[1:34:09] buy a 400 $60,000 piece of equipment to

[1:34:12] make it happen. I think we can do it

[1:34:14] with a lease for a summer and and make

[1:34:17] it happen that way.

[1:34:19] >> Can we suggest that?

[1:34:26] » Uh, Mike, you've got your hand up.

[1:34:30] Um, yeah, I kind of, you know, that's I

[1:34:35] mean, my my big concern is just,

[1:34:39] you know, we had

[1:34:41] we kind of had the same thing happened.

[1:34:43] We had some roads that were two tracks

[1:34:45] and just kind of nice fun roads and

[1:34:50] um they got bladed uh for some reason.

[1:34:55] Um

[1:34:56] uh and and I think the reasoning was

[1:34:59] good, but and it probably overall I

[1:35:03] think they were bladed to make sure that

[1:35:05] they didn't get closed, you know, but it did, you know, that was probably

[1:35:10] 10 years ago and they're still pretty

[1:35:13] good roads, you know, and and lots of

[1:35:16] times those go back to to where they're

[1:35:19] kind of fit in that trail category. it.

[1:35:21] But they it did change the experience of

[1:35:24] driving those roads and stuff. And so,

[1:35:26] um, yeah, I mean, if I could, unlike

[1:35:30] Scott, if I could go down and see what

[1:35:32] they're planning on doing, then I might

[1:35:34] change my mind. But without that, um, I

[1:35:37] just I just I just need some kind of

[1:35:41] insurance or assurance that they weren't going to go, you know,

[1:35:47] I I when I think of trail maintenance, I

[1:35:49] think kind of spots that need it. Um,

[1:35:52] and sometimes that is lay the put the

[1:35:55] blade down and go, you know, but um,

[1:35:58] yeah. So if if there was some kind of

[1:36:01] insure assurance that they were just

[1:36:03] going to kind of spot maintain um then I would probably go change my mind

[1:36:09] but I don't know that they could give me

[1:36:12] that without especially without me being

[1:36:14] really being familiar with it. So

[1:36:18] >> thanks Mike Scott you're up next.

[1:36:20] >> Yeah, a thought that I didn't bring up

[1:36:23] before and Wade reminded me of it. Uh, I

[1:36:26] think Garfield County is the most

[1:36:28] pro-access county in our state and they

[1:36:32] have worked

[1:36:34] hard to keep routes open. Uh, they're

[1:36:37] reopening routes that have been closed

[1:36:39] for years. Uh, and on that note, I I

[1:36:43] want to give them kind of benefit of the

[1:36:45] doubt to some extent. And and if it was

[1:36:48] if Salt Lake County was asking me for

[1:36:50] this, I would say absolutely not. But

[1:36:52] Garfield Countyy's asking for it and and they have done some really neat

[1:36:57] things. They have opened some routes

[1:36:58] that are just great, super good routes.

[1:37:02] And so I guess that's why I'm I'm

[1:37:05] saying, hey, I'm I'm I'm willing to

[1:37:07] fight for them. And uh and maybe even if

[1:37:10] they get it, I will still go down and

[1:37:12] ask them what they're going to be doing

[1:37:14] with the machine.

[1:37:17] » Okay. Nicole.

[1:37:20] >> Yeah. And I guess Wade kind of spurred a

[1:37:22] thought for me as well and kind

[1:37:24] [clears throat] of stems off of what

[1:37:26] Wheeler was just saying, but you know,

[1:37:28] Garfield County has a great partnership

[1:37:30] with its surrounding counties where

[1:37:32] they, you know, where it doesn't make

[1:37:34] exactly the perfect, you know, it's

[1:37:36] easier to access from another county or

[1:37:38] it's easier to access from their county

[1:37:40] to do trail maintenance. And they work

[1:37:42] very collaboratively with some other

[1:37:44] counties. And so I think this tool could

[1:37:46] be used more than just right there in

[1:37:49] Garfield. You know, it could help some

[1:37:51] of the surrounding counties, too.

[1:37:56] » All right, David.

[1:37:58] >> Yeah, I realize I'm not a voting member,

[1:38:01] but uh my thought here is I I agree with

[1:38:05] Nicole. All class B roads are not

[1:38:07] created equal, and some of them are

[1:38:09] bladed and maintained for a permit or

[1:38:12] other reasons. So if they wanted to

[1:38:15] maintain those roads they're already

[1:38:16] maintaining that are county class D, I

[1:38:18] think that would be appropriate. Maybe

[1:38:20] that would be a caveat that would make

[1:38:22] everybody feel comfortable. So instead

[1:38:24] of saying you can just maintain all

[1:38:26] county class D, it's county class D's

[1:38:29] that are currently being maintained at

[1:38:32] some level with a machine.

[1:38:36] Well, couldn't if they're matching money

[1:38:39] from the county and saying, "Okay, this

[1:38:42] machine's going to cost this much." Can

[1:38:45] they say, "Hey, we're going to match it

[1:38:46] at this level here, and we will use it

[1:38:49] at 20% of the time on a class B road or

[1:38:52] 10% of the time on a class B road. Can

[1:38:55] we figure this into the equation?"

[1:39:01] I know that's not said in the grant, but

[1:39:03] uh you know, we've done that before with

[1:39:06] other pieces of equipment where it's

[1:39:08] non-motorized and motorized and they

[1:39:10] have to match, but uh uh

[1:39:14] >> I don't think they I don't think

[1:39:16] Garfield County specified B money coming

[1:39:19] into

[1:39:19] >> No, they did. They did not. But I'm just

[1:39:21] saying uh uh

[1:39:33] Yeah, that was

[1:39:38] Yep. [laughter]

[1:39:41] Russ, what's your

[1:39:43] thought?

[1:39:46] Um, so they moved us over from over, but

[1:39:50] they still included that

[1:39:53] pending grant money from over which

[1:39:55] they're not they weren't approved. So, I

[1:40:00] don't know how you really advance it

[1:40:01] when one of their funding legs isn't

[1:40:07] >> I was suggested

[1:40:09] >> that they go ahead and reapply in two

[1:40:12] months on the next cycle if they they

[1:40:14] have to have that funding, but I was

[1:40:16] told that one way or another they're

[1:40:18] going to pursue this this this greater

[1:40:20] and uh they would like some help. He

[1:40:22] says it might take them a couple years

[1:40:24] before they can get it if they couldn't

[1:40:26] get any funding from uh some some the

[1:40:29] grants. And

[1:40:32] uh I guess right now I'm fighting for

[1:40:34] them on the deal, I suppose. So uh I'll

[1:40:37] just leave it at that.

[1:40:39] Mike, you're up next.

[1:40:45] » Man, this is hard. uh you know if we'll

[1:40:50] just write in there that they'll

[1:40:54] if I you know that and I don't know just write in the suggestion that they

[1:40:59] just

[1:41:00] bought maintain the trails

[1:41:04] especially just the two tracks and leave

[1:41:06] the majority of them two tracks if

[1:41:08] they'll if we'll just write that

[1:41:09] suggestion into the grant

[1:41:12] I'd change my name or change my vote

[1:41:18] Nicole,

[1:41:20] >> and I think my comment kind of goes

[1:41:22] along with Mike's, but um I like what

[1:41:24] David had to say, like, you know, could

[1:41:27] we write it to where it says only the

[1:41:29] roads that are currently being

[1:41:30] maintained? And then my suggestion was

[1:41:33] kind of what Mike's just saying there is

[1:41:35] um you know, and spot maintain where

[1:41:37] needed, you know, because sometimes you

[1:41:39] get goalie washers and road kind of

[1:41:41] washes out and you're going to need to

[1:41:42] go spot maintain. So, you know, if we

[1:41:45] kind of give them a little bit of

[1:41:46] guidance on how we'd like to see it

[1:41:48] used, like I I think that could be a

[1:41:51] good good way to move forward.

[1:41:57] » Marine, do you see any issue with that?

[1:42:01] >> No. So, you're thinking of giving them

[1:42:02] the full funding then? So, we're not

[1:42:04] going down the path where we'd want to

[1:42:05] say anything about leasing the

[1:42:07] equipment.

[1:42:12] That's not what I'm suggesting. My

[1:42:14] suggestion is give them full funding,

[1:42:16] but just write in the grant like to be

[1:42:19] used on already maintained roads and you

[1:42:22] know spot maintenance on unmaintained

[1:42:25] roads.

[1:42:27] >> Okay. Yep. I have that down.

[1:42:37] So, does that mean I have changed my

[1:42:38] vote to yes

[1:42:40] to move this on? So,

[1:42:43] >> well, I'm just trying to think through

[1:42:44] that, too, because what's going to

[1:42:46] prevent them from saying, "Oh, yeah,

[1:42:48] that that road's now a maintained road."

[1:42:51] You know what I mean? I don't know how

[1:42:53] you even police that or it would just be

[1:42:57] so nice if we had a map of what what

[1:42:59] roads they're looking at. Eric, you've

[1:43:01] got your hand up.

[1:43:03] >> Yeah, just re re Oh, sorry, I can't even

[1:43:06] talk. It's the end of the day. Reiterate

[1:43:10] what's been said before is I trust

[1:43:13] Garfield County's judgment at this point

[1:43:17] based on everything I've seen them do

[1:43:20] um in the last five, six years that

[1:43:24] they've been coming to us for funding.

[1:43:26] Um, I don't think there's going to be a

[1:43:28] problem with them just dropping the

[1:43:30] blade and grading everything. I think

[1:43:32] they understand what a good experience

[1:43:36] is and and I'm just going to have to

[1:43:38] have faith that they do that. I mean, we

[1:43:41] don't we don't go out and police

[1:43:44] everybody else. I mean, we we can make

[1:43:46] our thoughts known. We can make a

[1:43:48] recommendation. Hey, you know, with this

[1:43:50] greater, it'd be great if you didn't

[1:43:52] ruin the experience by turning

[1:43:54] everything into a highway, but at the

[1:43:57] same time, I I've got faith that they'll

[1:44:00] use their heads. So, that's that's my

[1:44:03] thoughts and I'm ready to vote.

[1:44:06] >> I'll just quickly add, I think Eric

[1:44:08] makes a great point. I mean, if we fund

[1:44:10] this, we can kind of give them our two

[1:44:13] cents, but if they find funding other

[1:44:15] ways, you know, our two cents are not,

[1:44:18] they don't have to consider them. So,

[1:44:25] » okay. Well, with those conditions, let's go ahead and vote on it. Again,

[1:44:30] >> Jason, one more thing. Uh, there's no

[1:44:33] restrictions in using RTP money for B

[1:44:37] roads.

[1:44:41] Okay. Yeah. And I think I had a question

[1:44:43] about that, too. Um, which I I think I

[1:44:49] Yeah.

[1:44:54] » Okay. Let's go ahead and vote on it. Um,

[1:44:57] we'll start with Nicole then.

[1:44:59] >> I'm a yes.

[1:45:01] >> Russ,

[1:45:02] >> no.

[1:45:04] >> Scott,

[1:45:06] >> yes.

[1:45:08] Uh Brett

[1:45:13] » Wheeler talked me into it. Yes.

[1:45:16] >> Brody.

[1:45:18] >> Yes.

[1:45:20] >> Um let's see. Eric,

[1:45:23] >> yes.

[1:45:25] >> And Mike.

[1:45:28] >> Yeah. With the suggestion that they just

[1:45:31] are careful not to ruin the experience.

[1:45:36] Okay. And then I

[1:45:38] um

[1:45:41] I'll vote yes.

[1:45:48] Okay, let's go ahead and move on to the

[1:45:52] next one. This is the Salina Motocross

[1:45:56] uh and mountain bike park phase one.

[1:45:59] This was the same application that we

[1:46:01] had at over where we ultimately um

[1:46:05] decided not to fund it at that one

[1:46:07] because the landowner issues had not

[1:46:09] been taken care of. Is there any updates

[1:46:11] on that or do we have any more

[1:46:12] information?

[1:46:16] » None was provided to me.

[1:46:19] >> Okay,

[1:46:23] » let's go ahead and vote on this one

[1:46:24] then.

[1:46:26] Um, we'll see.

[1:46:28] >> Quick question. So, there was no

[1:46:30] agreement between the city and the land

[1:46:34] owner then. They never reached an

[1:46:35] agreement.

[1:46:37] >> No.

[1:46:38] >> Okay. Just want to double check that.

[1:46:42] >> Okay. Thanks. Uh, Russ,

[1:46:47] » no.

[1:46:49] >> Scott,

[1:46:51] >> no.

[1:46:53] >> Brett,

[1:46:54] >> no. Brody,

[1:46:56] >> no.

[1:46:57] >> Eric,

[1:46:58] >> no.

[1:46:59] >> Uh, Mike,

[1:47:01] >> no.

[1:47:02] >> Nicole,

[1:47:03] >> no.

[1:47:04] >> All right, I'll vote no as well.

[1:47:09] » Okay, the next one. Let's go back up to

[1:47:13] the trail dozer for San Pee County.

[1:47:23] » Quick question. And where were we at on

[1:47:24] funds?

[1:47:26] >> Yeah, thanks for asking it because I do

[1:47:27] need to clarify something real quick. I

[1:47:29] did miss a I I mischecked a box earlier.

[1:47:32] So I I gave you guys an accurate total.

[1:47:34] So right now we've awarded uh $600,000.

[1:47:38] So 600,545

[1:47:41] awarded. Uh and there is a balance of

[1:47:44] 343,000

[1:47:46] still available. So $343,022

[1:47:49] available.

[1:47:54] Okay, thank you, Evan.

[1:47:57] >> What grants do we have left to look at?

[1:47:59] >> Trail dozer and the uh forecasting

[1:48:03] avalanche forecasting.

[1:48:05] >> Yeah.

[1:48:08] » So, if I do my math correctly, which is

[1:48:11] really hard because I don't have enough

[1:48:13] fingers and toes, but we should have

[1:48:16] enough to fund the rest. I mean, would

[1:48:18] anybody be opposed to the the idea of

[1:48:20] just blanket funding the last two or do

[1:48:23] we does anybody want to have further

[1:48:25] discussions on them?

[1:48:26] >> I'd like to have a little discussion on

[1:48:28] this trail dozer.

[1:48:30] >> Okay.

[1:48:31] >> Um, so my thoughts are is I mean it's a

[1:48:36] little dozer as dozers go. It's it

[1:48:39] weighs about 20,000 lbs. It's 6 foot

[1:48:42] tracks. has a

[1:48:45] nine and a half foot blade or something

[1:48:47] like that. And

[1:48:49] um and it's but it's still a dozer. It's

[1:48:53] a onepurpose machine

[1:48:56] strictly to push I mean that's all

[1:48:59] dozers do is push dirt. Um, so,

[1:49:04] uh, my thoughts are is and I called and

[1:49:08] talked to them and they're just like,

[1:49:10] well, that's what the road department

[1:49:12] said they wanted, you know, kind of

[1:49:14] that's what they needed to do these

[1:49:16] roads and stuff. And so, um, and and I

[1:49:21] also

[1:49:23] do 80 miles of road and we're going to

[1:49:25] smooth them out so they're our older

[1:49:27] people aren't getting beat up so much.

[1:49:29] So, I have a little bit of the same

[1:49:31] heartache with that they're just going

[1:49:34] to take 80 miles of two tracks and turn

[1:49:36] them into nice smooth roads. Um, but my

[1:49:39] main thing was is I don't think it's the

[1:49:42] appropriate piece of equipment.

[1:49:45] um they can buy

[1:49:49] uh for our trail crew a couple years

[1:49:51] back, we picked a we bought a a skid

[1:49:55] steer that's roughly the same size, same

[1:49:58] horsepower. It's about 120,000 and it's

[1:50:02] way more versatile. You can get a little

[1:50:05] dozer blade. You have buckets, forks,

[1:50:07] grater attachments.

[1:50:09] Um, and

[1:50:13] uh and I think I think that would I'm

[1:50:18] okay with this grant. If they would buy

[1:50:21] uh look at buying a skid steer and some

[1:50:24] attachments,

[1:50:26] I think it would be a lot better, more

[1:50:28] versatile machine and get it to places

[1:50:31] easier.

[1:50:32] Um, it moves around. You know, I just

[1:50:37] don't think a dozer's the right piece of

[1:50:40] equipment. And I talked to I can't

[1:50:42] remember his name like Elmer or

[1:50:45] uh the the I think it was the Forest

[1:50:48] Service

[1:50:50] guy and and and and suggested that to

[1:50:53] him and he was like, "Yeah, that that

[1:50:57] would work." you know, cuz they need a a

[1:51:00] bigger than a trail dozer, but but they

[1:51:02] need a but but that skid steer um a

[1:51:08] bigger skid steer would would do

[1:51:10] everything they needed to do uh and

[1:51:13] more. And so I would I mean my my

[1:51:18] suggestion on this would be to fund fund

[1:51:21] it at like

[1:51:23] 150

[1:51:24] uh thousand or something like that.

[1:51:27] and have them buy a a skid steer uh a

[1:51:32] comparable skid steer to that dozer.

[1:51:36] >> Um and from what I hear, I think they'd

[1:51:39] be okay with that. So,

[1:51:43] >> one one of the things Thanks, Mike. One

[1:51:45] of the things that I did notice on this

[1:51:46] application, they didn't have any

[1:51:48] support letters from OV groups. Um, so

[1:51:52] it it looks like this is

[1:51:55] more or less a county just trying to get

[1:51:57] a piece of equipment to do a do whatever

[1:52:00] on any of their roads, which they said

[1:52:03] that they are using B-roll funds and

[1:52:05] they essentially will be using it on

[1:52:07] B-ros, which is not necessarily like

[1:52:10] what Scott brought up earlier, that's

[1:52:11] not necessarily a bad thing. Um, but it just seems like um cost for the

[1:52:21] number of miles of trail that they say

[1:52:23] that they're going to maintain with it

[1:52:25] is pretty high. Um, and so that that's

[1:52:29] my input on it. Dave, you've got your

[1:52:31] hand up.

[1:52:33] >> Yeah, I just wondered if the forest

[1:52:35] there has a trail dozer. you know, if

[1:52:37] there's another way to maintain trails

[1:52:39] on their smaller stuff. This is only

[1:52:41] going to be good for their roads versus

[1:52:43] their 50-inch or, you know, 62 inch

[1:52:46] whatever trails. Just wondered if

[1:52:48] anybody has that information.

[1:52:50] >> Um, I do actually. Sorry, Nicole. Um,

[1:52:54] uh, the

[1:52:57] Wade, what was his name that I talked

[1:52:58] to? Um,

[1:53:00] >> his name is Kevin Christensen.

[1:53:03] >> Yeah. know the other guy at the forest

[1:53:06] that

[1:53:07] >> Oh, was it was it it was Myron Jeffs is

[1:53:10] who you talked to in the meeting. Mike

[1:53:12] and I had a meeting with Myron.

[1:53:15] >> Yeah. And and he and and they're talking

[1:53:18] about the forest roads up there and and

[1:53:21] that's what he said when I made that

[1:53:23] suggestion about a skid steer. He was

[1:53:24] just like, "Well, we have a trail dozer

[1:53:26] and a little mini X and everything to do

[1:53:28] those 50-inch trails." And when I made

[1:53:31] it clear I was talking about a bigger

[1:53:34] skid steer with like an 8ft dozer blade

[1:53:37] uh you know a bigger skid steer he was

[1:53:39] like oh yeah that would do what we need

[1:53:41] to do and and um so so they are looking

[1:53:47] for something that to handle the

[1:53:50] maintenance of the the wider roads not

[1:53:53] necessarily the 50inch trails you know

[1:53:56] the wider two tracks and stuff and and the pictures had big mud holes

[1:54:02] and everything, but and and I think a

[1:54:05] skid steer would be the ideal piece of

[1:54:08] machinery to fix those mud holes, do

[1:54:10] that kind of spot maintenance that's

[1:54:12] needed versus just drop a blade on the

[1:54:15] whole 80 miles of road.

[1:54:18] So,

[1:54:21] >> Mike, what would be the

[1:54:23] >> pros and cons of having a midsize Minia

[1:54:26] X with a sixway blade on it? Uh, is

[1:54:30] there some pros and cons of having a a a Mini X as opposed to a skidster with,

[1:54:37] you know, with a sixeight blade on it?

[1:54:40] Um, I think the only the pro to a skid

[1:54:44] steer um would be a little bit more

[1:54:49] versatile. You can get a bunch of

[1:54:51] different attachments to the skid steer

[1:54:54] where a Mini X I mean a Mini X is

[1:54:57] awesome and they you can do about

[1:54:59] anything with it. It would do it's a

[1:55:02] little slower to get into places if you

[1:55:04] have to road it. Uh, you know, a skid

[1:55:09] steer has buckets and you can get back

[1:55:12] attachments and with all the attachments

[1:55:15] on it. But

[1:55:16] >> so would this be a wheeled skidster or a

[1:55:19] track skidster?

[1:55:20] >> I'd buy the tracked skid steer.

[1:55:27] » And my question was pointed at you,

[1:55:29] Mike. Would 150,000 for a skid steer get

[1:55:32] them the attachments they need to or

[1:55:34] would they still need that full 200,000

[1:55:37] to get sort of the attachments that they

[1:55:39] need?

[1:55:40] >> Um, if if I remember right, I think our

[1:55:44] skid steer now it's been a few years. It

[1:55:46] was like 115,000

[1:55:49] or something like that. And so that

[1:55:52] should give them enough to get I I think

[1:55:55] those dozer blades run in the5 to

[1:55:57] $8,000.

[1:55:59] Um so that would get them a bucket

[1:56:02] probably forks a dozer blade, you know,

[1:56:06] for a little bit more. I mean, I

[1:56:07] wouldn't even care if we went to like

[1:56:09] 175,000 or something like that, you

[1:56:11] know. Um,

[1:56:15] just to give it some

[1:56:18] >> What if we kind of

[1:56:21] like said we would fund it, but kind of

[1:56:23] put the caveat back on them that they

[1:56:26] the road department really needs to talk

[1:56:28] with the Forest Service and decide which

[1:56:30] piece of equipment is the right one, you

[1:56:33] know, for them to work in partnership

[1:56:35] together the best and then kind of leave

[1:56:38] it to them to decide together. I I think

[1:56:41] Nicole that that Myer and Jeff did kind

[1:56:44] of say that after Mike talked to him

[1:56:46] that I think that he was very on board

[1:56:49] with the skidster rather than the dozer.

[1:56:52] >> And did we talk to the county? Are they okay with that switch?

[1:56:56] >> Um, no. We did not talk with with Kevin.

[1:57:02] Well, that's my issue, too, is kind of

[1:57:05] to Eric's point earlier that the they

[1:57:09] know what they need for what they're

[1:57:10] using it for. They're going to be

[1:57:11] splitting it between their roads, um,

[1:57:14] their other roads and this 80 miles of

[1:57:16] trail, and they might need it for

[1:57:18] something bigger than this 80 miles of

[1:57:21] trail. But if they're bringing money to

[1:57:22] the table for their roads and it will

[1:57:26] just so happen to work on this trail, I

[1:57:28] don't know that we necessarily have

[1:57:31] the say on what what the best pieces of

[1:57:34] equipment is for them. Um I I think to

[1:57:38] me the bigger issue is there's no

[1:57:41] collaboration with an OBV group and

[1:57:45] um it's a lot of money for how many

[1:57:48] miles of trail they're lifting.

[1:57:53] And I think I'm I'm okay with this, but

[1:57:55] I would like kind of like Jason just

[1:57:57] said, you know, they kind of know what

[1:57:59] they need. Maybe they haven't thought

[1:58:01] about this, so you know, kind of fund

[1:58:03] it, but put that caveat that they need

[1:58:05] to have that communication and have that

[1:58:07] conversation before they buy that piece

[1:58:09] of equipment.

[1:58:11] >> Hey Wade, have you have a conversation

[1:58:13] with you say Brett Christensen? Is that

[1:58:16] the person?

[1:58:18] Have you had a conversation with him

[1:58:20] about the usage of that piece of

[1:58:23] equipment and their need?

[1:58:26] >> Yeah. Um

[1:58:29] they the the original need when I talked

[1:58:32] to them, the original need was to get um

[1:58:35] a 50-inch trail cat. And when they went

[1:58:39] to the Forest Service, the Forest

[1:58:41] Service told the county or yeah, when I

[1:58:44] refer to county, that's Kevin. Kevin is

[1:58:46] San Pete County. Um they said the bigger

[1:58:50] need is for these class 2 roads that are

[1:58:54] part of the Arapene trail system. The 66

[1:58:57] and below 66 in the Manti for said we're

[1:59:02] pretty confident in getting those done.

[1:59:05] But they said there's those roads that

[1:59:07] fall in between

[1:59:09] the 66 in trails and the main county

[1:59:12] roads or the main forest service roads.

[1:59:15] They're called class 2 forest service

[1:59:17] roads. Those receive absolutely zero

[1:59:20] maintenance. The forest service does not

[1:59:22] have the manpower to do it and those are

[1:59:25] not considered even though they're part

[1:59:27] of the Aropene trail system, they are

[1:59:29] not considered a trail because they are

[1:59:31] wider than 66 in. So there's this little

[1:59:35] gray area that's fallen through that

[1:59:37] that's where the when they went to the

[1:59:39] Forest Service and said we wanted that

[1:59:40] 50-inch Waco, they said we wouldn't

[1:59:42] support it, but we would support you

[1:59:45] with something to maintain those level

[1:59:49] two roads. And Mike was in on that

[1:59:51] conversation

[1:59:53] um that we had with the Forest Service

[1:59:55] on that. So that's why it went from a

[1:59:57] trail cat to more a bigger piece of

[2:00:01] equipment.

[2:00:10] Eric, go ahead.

[2:00:12] I love to extend these conversations,

[2:00:14] especially where it's my last night.

[2:00:19] Just kidding. So,

[2:00:21] I, as we're all aware, these machines

[2:00:23] are getting bigger and bigger, and I am,

[2:00:26] as much as anybody, I'm not a fan of

[2:00:30] making stuff easier.

[2:00:32] or necessarily more comfortable, but

[2:00:34] there is issues

[2:00:37] on these roads. And really, if you think

[2:00:40] about it, we spend quite a bit of time

[2:00:42] on these class 2 roads. When you're up

[2:00:45] the canyon, you are going back and

[2:00:48] forth. You're going down old fire roads,

[2:00:51] you know, old logging roads. I mean,

[2:00:53] it's a lot of times it's this little bit

[2:00:56] bigger road and it's already a road. So,

[2:01:00] I don't know that they're going to be

[2:01:01] hurting it too much, but there is

[2:01:03] there's drainage drainage issues a lot

[2:01:06] and they do need to be maintained. And I

[2:01:09] can see how, you know, you you see where

[2:01:12] they've used a trail cat on these bigger

[2:01:14] roads and you're just going, "Man, I bet

[2:01:15] that was miserable, you know, bringing

[2:01:18] that in and doing all this work on with

[2:01:20] just a little 50-inch trail dozer." But

[2:01:22] anyways, that's that's my thought. I I I

[2:01:25] support them with whatever they think

[2:01:27] they need.

[2:01:28] Um, I I think this is a good use of

[2:01:31] money. It's the area gets used like

[2:01:34] crazy. If these guys are all going to

[2:01:37] play nicely together and work together,

[2:01:39] let's give them the tools to do it

[2:01:41] whatever they think they need.

[2:01:46] » Thanks, Eric.

[2:01:50] Okay, let's go ahead and vote on it.

[2:01:54] » Uh, quick question. Are we just voting

[2:01:56] straight like yes or no on the funding

[2:01:59] or is this could the funding be used for

[2:02:02] the um machine that Mike was talking

[2:02:04] about or the the one that's here in the

[2:02:08] proposal in front of us?

[2:02:13] » Um

[2:02:15] I'll make a motion.

[2:02:17] >> Yeah, go ahead, Eric.

[2:02:19] So, I make a motion that Evan reaches

[2:02:22] out and Maren to look and see if they

[2:02:26] can rewrite the contract a little bit to

[2:02:28] leave it up to them to find the best

[2:02:32] um equipment they can for the best price

[2:02:34] they can that's less than what we're

[2:02:37] going to approve.

[2:02:40] » Is that too long of a motion?

[2:02:42] >> Probably.

[2:02:45] But I think I think to sum up what has

[2:02:47] been talked about is that they work with

[2:02:48] the Forest Service and a local group to

[2:02:51] identify what the best piece of

[2:02:53] equipment is.

[2:02:54] >> I love it.

[2:02:56] >> And I can support that.

[2:02:58] >> Okay.

[2:03:01] >> It it might be best to name the specific

[2:03:03] stakeholders you'd like to see involved.

[2:03:09] What are the OV groups in uh San Pi

[2:03:11] County? That would

[2:03:12] >> I would uh recommend the Castle Country

[2:03:14] OV group. They're the Manti. Um and that

[2:03:19] Rome West, we already seen a letter of

[2:03:21] support from them on another

[2:03:23] application.

[2:03:24] Um that's a nonprofit out of Ephraim,

[2:03:29] but I think the bigger club would be

[2:03:30] Castle Country. So, if we could put both

[2:03:33] in there, that would be great. But if

[2:03:34] you picked one or the other, Marine, not

[2:03:36] to confuse it, Castle Country OV is the

[2:03:38] one I'd recommend.

[2:03:41] >> Okay. And then have them coordinate with

[2:03:43] the Forest Service.

[2:03:45] >> Yeah.

[2:03:52] » Okay. Does that work for everybody?

[2:03:56] >> I'm good with that.

[2:03:58] >> Cool. Let's go ahead and vote on this

[2:04:00] then. Um I think Brett already left.

[2:04:05] Uh, we'll go with

[2:04:08] Rodie.

[2:04:09] >> Yes.

[2:04:12] >> Eric,

[2:04:13] >> yes.

[2:04:15] >> Uh, Mike,

[2:04:17] >> yes.

[2:04:18] >> Nicole,

[2:04:19] >> yes.

[2:04:20] >> Russ,

[2:04:21] >> yes.

[2:04:22] >> Scott,

[2:04:24] >> yes.

[2:04:25] >> And all vote yes as well.

[2:04:28] Okay, last one on the list is the Utah

[2:04:31] Avalanche Center.

[2:04:34] forecasting.

[2:04:38] Any other discussion on this one or do

[2:04:40] we want to vote on Oh, Mike's got his

[2:04:42] hand up. Imagine that. I have something

[2:04:44] to say. Um, yeah, I I'd vote to fund

[2:04:49] this without the ambassador part. Um,

[2:04:54] let me pull that budget up for you

[2:04:56] >> that we take that ambassador

[2:05:00] position out of it.

[2:05:08] I was concerned about that also.

[2:05:17] So that would take out both the

[2:05:20] ambassador

[2:05:22] um wages and the materials. Is that

[2:05:24] right?

[2:05:27] >> Yes.

[2:05:34] but leave the forecasting.

[2:05:38] So, we've got it sounds like we've got a

[2:05:40] motion from Mike

[2:05:42] and a second by Scott.

[2:05:46] Is that right?

[2:05:47] >> Yes.

[2:05:50] Um,

[2:05:52] let's all those in favor of voting on it

[2:05:57] with the reduced budget say I.

[2:06:01] >> I.

[2:06:04] Any opposed?

[2:06:08] Okay. Let's go ahead and vote on it with

[2:06:10] this revised budget. Um, we'll start

[2:06:14] with

[2:06:17] Well, let's see. We'll start with Mike.

[2:06:22] >> Yes.

[2:06:24] >> Nicole,

[2:06:25] >> yes.

[2:06:27] >> Russ,

[2:06:28] >> yes.

[2:06:29] >> Scott,

[2:06:31] >> yes.

[2:06:32] >> Uh, Brody,

[2:06:34] >> yes.

[2:06:36] >> And we'll finish it with Eric.

[2:06:39] >> Sweet. Yes.

[2:06:42] All right.

[2:06:44] >> And I'll I guess I'll vote yes as well.

[2:06:46] Sorry.

[2:06:48] >> Still my thunder, man.

[2:06:51] [laughter]

[2:06:53] » Okay. Looks like that's awesome. Do you

[2:06:56] have a summary for us, Evan, of what's

[2:06:58] been

[2:06:59] >> Yeah. Let me just give me one second

[2:07:00] here. I'm pulling up for you guys.

[2:07:03] >> Super quick math.

[2:07:05] >> So, I can give you just the the math

[2:07:07] real quick. I was going to try to pull

[2:07:08] up my my fancy thing here, but uh so as

[2:07:10] of now, that would put the total awarded

[2:07:12] amount at 842,834.

[2:07:17] Uh that leaves a balance ofund 100,732.

[2:07:24] » Awesome.

[2:07:25] >> Which would again, you know, roll over.

[2:07:29] » Okay.

[2:07:32] Um,

[2:07:34] do we need a final vote to move this

[2:07:36] list forward or is that are we good with

[2:07:38] how it is?

[2:07:41] >> If everybody feels good.

[2:07:45] >> Awesome. Well, thank you everybody uh

[2:07:48] for your time tonight. It was uh

[2:07:52] it was good discussions and good

[2:07:54] questions asked. We sure appreciate

[2:07:56] everybody. And uh we'll let uh Eric give

[2:07:59] us his parting words,

[2:08:03] the closing prayer.

[2:08:06] Sweet. No, I just want I [clears throat]

[2:08:09] want you to know how much I've really

[2:08:11] appreciated doing this. You guys know

[2:08:12] I'm

[2:08:14] pretty passionate about land use and and

[2:08:18] how we're spending our money and and

[2:08:20] I've got all the faith in the world in

[2:08:22] this current group moving forward. Um,

[2:08:25] if you guys ever have any questions

[2:08:26] about what's happened in the past or

[2:08:29] anything like that, you guys are always

[2:08:31] more than welcome to to hit me up. I

[2:08:34] might even maybe attend and cat call

[2:08:37] from the from the cheap seats sometimes

[2:08:40] just to make sure the conversations are going well. But no, appreciate all

[2:08:45] you guys. Thanks for the opportunity.

[2:08:47] Uh, I love the program and uh I like to

[2:08:51] see where it's going lately. So, thanks

[2:08:53] guys.

[2:08:55] I'm gonna miss you, Eric, on it because

[2:08:57] I I know that you're passionate. I can

[2:08:59] tell and so I always listen to what you

[2:09:01] had to say really intently. So, I'm

[2:09:03] going to miss you on here.

[2:09:05] >> Well, thank you.

[2:09:08] >> Hey, and Eric, stop hanging out with old

[2:09:10] people.

[2:09:13] >> See what I can do. Thanks, Scott.

[2:09:16] >> Um, Rachel had a hand up.

[2:09:20] >> Yeah. Well, also Eric is trying to not

[2:09:23] hang out with old people. That's why

[2:09:24] he's leaving this committee.

[2:09:28] >> So,

[2:09:31] [clears throat] but yeah, I just want to

[2:09:33] kind of give provide some highlights for

[2:09:35] our next grant meeting. I sent an email

[2:09:37] out to everyone. So, just a quick update

[2:09:40] on because Eric is leaving us and then

[2:09:43] so is Kirk. Um, we're going to be

[2:09:46] opening up two advisory council

[2:09:47] positions. Those applications will go

[2:09:50] out in on May 7th and it'll close May

[2:09:54] 31st at 5:00 pm. And then our next

[2:09:56] council meeting will be virtual from

[2:09:59] 5:30 to 7:30 and that will take place on

[2:10:03] Wednesday, June 17th. So, everyone

[2:10:06] should have received an email from me

[2:10:08] during this meeting. So, if anyone has

[2:10:10] any questions, please let me know. But

[2:10:12] again, Eric, thank you so much. And I

[2:10:14] know Kirk's not here, but I just want to

[2:10:16] thank him as well. You guys have done a

[2:10:17] phenomenal job and I know we've put you

[2:10:19] through the ringer and we appreciate it.

[2:10:24] » Thanks. We'll miss you.

[2:10:26] >> Yeah.

[2:10:27] >> Thanks, Eric.

[2:10:28] >> Yep.

[2:10:32] » Okay. Well, thank you everybody. Um,

[2:10:35] with that, I think we'll call that a

[2:10:37] wrap and uh we'll entertain a motion to

[2:10:40] adjurnn.

[2:10:42] >> Uh, can I make that motion?

[2:10:44] >> You betcha.

[2:10:46] I'd like to make a motion to adjourn

[2:10:48] this meeting tonight.

[2:10:53] » Motion made by Eric.

[2:10:55] >> I'll second.

[2:10:57] >> We are adjourned. Eric, cheers.

[2:11:03] » Awesome. Thanks, Eric. And thank you

[2:11:04] everybody for just being a part of this.

[2:11:06] Really appreciate all the input. See you

[2:11:08] guys.

Off-Highway Vehicle Advisory Council 4/29/2026

Transcript