Item 2D: Ratification of IGR Committee Actions of December 16, 2009

Home Browse Search

Mr. Poling asked that staff provide the committee with information on the amount of A6 funds available and what percentage of that the proposed commitment of $20,000 represented. He said that would be useful information to include on future requests for approval of grant applications when match funds were involved. Ms. Ortiz, seconded by Mr. Poling, moved to approval submission of the applica- tion to the Oregon Parks and Recreation Department for a Recreational Trails Program grant. The motion passed unanimously, 3:0. Ms. Wilson said staff apologized that the grant application to the Oregon State Weed Board had already been submitted. She said the application was due December 8, 2009, and staff found out about the opportunity two days earlier. She said the City was requesting $31,072, of which $28,432 would be dedicated to noxious weed survey and control efforts on the Ridgeline park system; the remaining $2,640 would be used for mowing services. She said no match was required, but $18,088 of in-kind match already allocated for Ridgeline projects was being proposed. Mr. Poling, seconded by Ms. Ortiz, moved to approval submission of the applica- tion to the Oregon State Weed Board for the Ridgeline park system. The motion passed unanimously, 3:0. Proposed Federal Priorities for United Front Ms. Wilson reviewed the United Front 2010 Proposed Projects List. She recommended removing the Public Safety Communications & Technology Emergency Services Simulator Lab project, which was a combined request with Lane County, because funds for the City and County portions had recently been awarded. She said it might be possible to request additional funds in the future for a later phase of the project. She said the Forest Legacy project was not likely to be funded under the current methodology unless more funds were available and recommended asking for an increase in the total programmatic funding level instead of making an individual project request. Ms. Piercy asked why Eugene’s Forest Legacy project had not been funded. Ms. Wilson explained that projects from across the State were ranked and submitted to the regional level; projects from the region were ranked and submitted to the federal level. Eugene’s project was #32 out of 45 projects on the federal list, possibly because its cost per acre was very high compared to other projects. She said requesting a programmatic funding increase instead of an individual project request meant there would not be a Forest Legacy project page in the United Front book. Ms. Wilson said the Bio-Energy Facility and Metropolitan Wastewater Management Commission (MWMC) Electrical Generator Upgrade projects were competing for the same funds, which was contrary to United Front procedures. The City’s federal lobbyists had advised keeping both projects on the list because of the large amount of funding being made available for energy efficiency projects. Ms. Wilson suggested removing Eugene’s request for an air monitoring station from the Bio-Energy Facility project as the practice of grass seed burning had been banned; that would make the facility a Lane County project only. She said upgrading the MWMC electrical generators would allow the practice of flaming off methane to be discontinued and thereby reduce greenhouse gas emissions. She recommended adding the MWMC Electrical Generator Upgrade project as a Eugene project on the United Front list. MINUTES—Council Committee on Intergovernmental Relations December 16, 2009 Page 2