Meeting Summary Planning Unit Chair: Walt Edelen, Spokane County Conservation District (SCCD) Present: Gary Ostheller, Fairfield Triangle Grange Peter Grunte, Hangman Valley Resident Steve Bortfeld, Hangman Hills Water District Doug Allen, Ecology Bryony Stasney, Golder Associates Jilla Harmon, SCCD MinuteS Walt asked for any corrections or comments to the February 17, 2004 meeting minutes that were distributed prior to today’s meeting. There were no additional changes and the minutes were approved as is. Open Discussion/Public Comment The Operations Manager is working with Cathy Hubbard on the restructure, and which Vicki had to send in an amendment. Walt did not have a hard copy of the report yet, but said that the Planning Unit has approximately $250,00 minus $16,000 at the end of December. Walt projected that the Planning Unit may have approximately $100,000 available to conduct additional projects or work related to the planning process. Since the Conservation District will complete the project under the remaining funds can be utilized for action items of importance to the planning unit. Walt would like ideas for implementation by next month. Doug Allen suggested that he would like to see us get a better handle on the upper aquifer system and how it behaves and where all the water ends up and maybe we could use some of the funds to do this. 319 Centennial Clean Water Fund Grant Application The Conservation District submitted an application for this funding with the Department of Ecology back in February 2004. A list has come back of all the proposals in WRIA 56 and the SCCD’s proposal was the only proposal in WRIA 56. In fact, it was the only proposal that was submitted from the entire County. The application now goes through the local priority process, where additional points that can be awarded to an application. The application goes through the local priority process such as the Planning Unit, which has all of the different agencies at the table discussing watershed planning. The planning unit then decides how many points it should receive beginning with 100 points, 90, etc. The summary of the project was sent out previously. Walt summarized the project for the Planning Unit members attending the meeting. The project is comprised of stabilizing a 1.3 mile reach of Hangman Creek (just downstream from California Creek). The area is prone to erosion due to unconsolidated soils and lack of vegetation. Tom Bumstead, the new northeast CD engineer, will help provide design and implementation of the project. Tom has extensive river mechanics and engineering experience. Reanette asked if there was some type of monitoring mechanism in place to see how well it is doing. Walt stated that post monitoring is an integral part of the actual application now. You have to have post monitoring design to follow what’s going on and to make sure that you are meeting your water quality objectives and that the project is moving ahead. There will be extensive survey work. Doug Allen proposed that we submit this project at the top of the list for this WRIA and give it 100 points. Gary Ostheller seconded the motion. Peter Grunte – yes Gary Ostheller – yes Dee Bailey – yes Reanette Boese – yes Bill Rickard – yes Steve Bortfeld – yes Walt will write a letter and submit the local priority ranking on behalf of the Planning Unit. Watershed Issues/Recommendations The 3/8/04 Issues and Recommendations document was reviewed. The following changes/additions were suggested: a) Projected Future Growth i) Some Municipal water systems may not have enough water to meet projected future growth. Recommendation(s): (b) CHANGE—Current water rights should be evaluated for availability for purchase or lease. Valid current water rights should be purchased or leased. (c) ADD—Allowance for commercial and industrial uses shall include an evaluation of consumptive water use. (i) Recommendation to the land use permitting authority on appropriate land use zoning based on the consumptive water use. THIS SECTION (g and i) WAS MOVED FROM THE HABITAT/LAND USE SECTION i) What are the impacts of projected growth over the next 20 – 50 years? Recommendation(s): (g) CORRECT—word except to exempt (i) ADD—No new exempt wells will be approved by land use authorities without a mitigation plan. Any rulemaking for Instream Flow will include this provision. b) Priorities of Future Water Allocation i) What does the PU foresee as a priority for future allocations? (industrial, agricultural, commercial, residential, other). Recommendation(s): (b) CHANGE—Pact to Agreement d) Groundwater/Surface Water Interactions i) Dr. John Buchanan has stated…. Recommendation(s) (e) ADD—Establish a new permanent gaging station at the stateline. Planning Unit Homework 1. For those involved with the selection of the consultant for the storage contract, please pick up your packets on Monday the 15th. You will need to score the proposals by Friday morning the 19th. We will then meet at the SCCD at 1:30 p.m. to discuss and select the consultant. 2. The updated recommendations list will be sent to the planning unit members. You will need to review each recommendation, decide whether you will support it and make comments for additions or modifications. Please submit this homework by March 19th. 3. Recommendations for projects to utilize the additional available funding. WRIA 56 Planning Unit Members Document Walt put together a document of the Planning Unit Voting Members. This document was compiled from Meeting Minutes in 2003 where it was discussed and decisions were made. The Planning Unit agreed that this document should be included in the March 9 meeting minutes in its entirety (SEE BELOW). The Planning Unit was reminded that anyone wanting copies of the consultant applications received by the March 12 deadline to let him know so that we can make copies if needed. They will be available to pick up in the afternoon on March 15, 2004. Walt will have the ranking procedures available also. The Planning Unit will meet on Friday, March 19, 2004 at 1:30pm to go over applications and make a decision. Next Meeting The next meeting will be held on Tuesday, March 23, 2004 from 10:00am – 12:00pm. at the SCCD offices. The meeting was adjourned at 12:10pm. ATTACHMENT WRIA 56 Planning Unit Members Lead Agency: The lead agency is defined as the entity that coordinates staff support of its own or of other local governments and receives grants for developing a watershed plan. § Spokane County Conservation District (1 vote) Initiating Governments: The planning process could only be initiated if the following entities unanimously agreed to proceed with assessing the status of the water resources of WRIA 56. The initiating governments must include all counties, the largest city or town, and largest water supply utility obtaining the largest quantity of water in the WRIA. For WRIA 56, the following are defined as the initiating governments by RCW 90.82. § Spokane County (1 vote) § Whitman County (1 vote, no participation or response to letters) § City of Spokane (1 vote) § Hangman Hills Water District (1 vote) Other Voting Members (date instated) § Agricultural/Rural Town Interests - Fairfield Triangle Grange – Gary Ostheller (7/16/02 – 1 vote) § State Caucus – Doug Allen (Ecology) (1 vote) § Private Residential Landowner - Peter Grunte (9/19/02 – 1 vote) § Commercial Development - Mike Barber (8/15/02 – 1 vote) Affected Tribes: – Tribes that do not have reservation lands in the management area, but may be impacted by planning process. § Spokane Tribe (offered voting status, but declined 8/02) § Coeur d’Alene Tribe (9/19/02 – 1 vote) Voting Requirements: A Quorum is required to make key decisions for the
WRIA 56
Hangman (Latah) Creek Local Watershed Plan
March 9, 2004
Reanette Boese, Spokane County
Bill Rickard, City of Spokane
Dee Bailey, Coeur d’Alene TribeQuarterly Report
Open Discussion/Public Comment
(current as of 3/8/04)WRIA 56 Voting Member Summary Votes Standing
management plan. The Planning Unit has defined QUORUM as follows: 60%
of voting members must be present at each meeting to constitute a quorum.