|
Russian River Watershed Council |
Board of Directors |
|
Date March 12, 2008, 4:00 pm – 6:00 pm |
Healdsburg Library |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Attendees: Scot Stegeman, President 4:00 Agenda Approved with new items – Ayes: 9 Nays: 0 Abstain: 0 Discussion of RRWA meeting, Political action issues/ Goldridge’s statement of policy 4:05 Minutes Approved with corrections – Ayes: 9 Nays: 0 Abstain: 0 Correct spelling of Bob Clemens and Scot Stegeman’s names 4:10 Officer Reports President – Sent a letter to Division of Water Rights asking for more workshops regarding the proposed In-stream Flow policies. Vice-President – Tim reported Kendall Smith, Mendocino Co Supervisor, asked the BOS to send a letter asking for more input and workshops, etc. Kendall thanked the RRWC for their involvement. Colleen stated that the RRWA was going to contact the State to ask that a consultant be hired to assist the local community with clarification of the document. Treasurer – An additional $415.00 was added to the RRWC account with the donations of the Board members. Scot will contact remaining Board members for donation. Tim will create a follow-up letter asking RRWC to donate to the cause. 4:20 RRWC May, August and November Meetings Karen requested the Board formulate panel questions to ensure the panel discussion run smoothly. Zeno suggested that the questions focus on issues relevant to the RRW. Scot stated that the questions had to be geared to issues that overlap in both watersheds. Brock said the main issues are water quality, water quantity and fish. It all revolves around these overarching issues. Questions discussed include: What are the processes that you believe there successful in the Klamath Watershed? What would you done different if you could stand back and start over?, How effective was your interaction with the State?, Are you satisfied with the position you have ended with?, What made the difference? What were the positive outcomes from the process? Future Meetings - The Board agreed to move the November Event to September 13 to assist in coordination of the event. They agreed to move the August meeting to the November date. 4:35 RRWC Future Direction Tim Buckner – People are over booked, over committed, and may be running out of time and energy to get things done. As VP, my productivity is not its best. With the lack of USACE and State funding, are we going to be able to function. Because we are a non-profit, we can not just drag on without thinking of the future. We still have a broad range of interest but need a creative approach. Bob Clemens – In 1998, the State mandated a citizens group come together to address watershed resource issues. RRIIS is not funded so this great system is being neglected. My main concern is RRIIS and a way to generate enthusiasm and draw more people in. Colleen – The RRWC serves as a clearing house for issues. Grant opportunities are out there. Private entities have not been approached. There is a place for us. The watershed approach is good and we need to address everyone’s concerns and interests. Peggy – We need commitment and state what we can provide. We need to leave here today with an agreement of what we are willing to do. Brittany – There are grant opportunities out there for watershed groups. Jerome – There are no fish returning so what are we going to do. What are solutions to this overarching problem and how can we realistically play a role. Brock – It has been 11 years. We are a new non-profit which needs a new approach and leave the garbage behind us. Let us get together and step up to the plate. Remove the egos from the system. What would this group do? Do we want to remake ourselves? I do not want to lose the effort. The Technical Review Committee wants an overarching organization that represents the watershed, such as the RRWC. Curtis – He asked his Board (Madrone Audubon) for the $100.00 donations and they had questions which need to be addressed to make us a more effective organization. Zeno – The RRWC is a group that can bring coordination and outreach to the RRW. We can provide a valuable service through bring issue to the people in the watershed. Zeno volunteered to serve as secretary. Scot – The short term problem is funds. We want to bring people in the door with energy and the commitment to help us function. There is a huge vacuum in the system today that the agencies would like us to fill. At this time, money is tight but I believe if we hang in there, we will be able to fill that vacuum. We need to come out of this meeting with a direction. We need to prove that we can function as the agencies want and encourage us to do. Bob R – We do not have a lot of energy around the table. That suggests bring in staff to bring in money for their salary and RRWC organizational funds. Opportunities may drop in our laps but not likely unless, we can do the work to make it happen.
5:50 New Items New items were not discussed (RRWA meeting, Political action issues/ Goldridge’s statement of policy) because of a lack of time. 5:55 Next Meeting Agenda Items - April 1, 2008 Board Meeting Zeno suggest that the next meeting be a face to face organization development meeting. Scot asked that we remain focused and to provide solutions for 1 or 2 issues to foster RRWC organization development. Meeting will be held at the Healdsburg Library on April 1, 4:00-6:00. The meeting will continue with discussion of RRWC future direction. 6:10 Adjourn |
|