[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.