Search this Chehalis River Council site!Chehalis Basin Partnership - July 23, 2004
Agenda Item B. 1.
Continuation of discussion on the implementation of the Watershed Plan
At its June 2004 meeting, the Chehalis Basin Partnership asked the Steering/Technical Committee (STC) to prepare a discussion on What do we do next?"
The recommendation of the STC is for the Partnership consider the following:
The future structure of the Partnership.
The development of an implementation plan for the Watershed Plan. ,
The next step for the STC in assisting the Partnership.
The future structure of the Partnership .
There are a number of options for the future structure of the Partnership. Each has strengths and limitations that will be important in how effective the organization will be in advancing it mission and activities (see page 3).
The STC identified these examples of organizational structures:
)1) The pre-2514 structure where the Chehalis Basin Partnership serves strictly as a coordinating body. (Pros/cons: i.e. this structure will limit the Chehalis Basin Partnership's ability to obtain funding.)
2) The current 2514 structure where the Chehalis Basin Partnership names a member to serve as lead agency. (Pros/cons: i.e. this would allow the Chehalis Basin Partnership access to some fund sources)
3) Form a nonprofit corporation (Pros/Cons: ?
4) Approach the legislature to form a legal entity similar to how the Lower Columbia Fish Recovery Board. (Pros/Cons: ?
A decision on the Chehalis Basin Partnership's structure does not need to be made immediately, but the structure is no longer defined by 2514.
The development of an implementation plan for the Watershed Plan .
The Partnership needs to address implementation of the Watershed Plan approved by the counties on May 28th, 2004, in order to continue moving forward. The Steering/Technical Committee identified for discussion the following three options for implementing the plan:
)1)The Chehalis Basin Partnership could choose to enter into a contractual obligation to undertake Phase 4 of the watershed planning process. (Pro's/Cons: This would provide funding in the amount of $125,000 per year for three years and a lesser amount for two more years, but it requires development of an implementation plan within 12 months of receiving the money. The Phase 4 implementation plan carries with it new requirements created by the legislature under the Municipal Bill.)
2) The Chehalis Basin Partnership chooses not to enter into Phase 4 implementation planning because of the new requirements created by the legislature and develops an implementation plan on its own. (Pros/Cons: The Chehalis Basin Partnership would not be eligible for 2514 funding for Phase 4, but the resulting
implementation plan would not be dictated by statute. The Chehalis Basin Partnership would have more flexibility.
3) Each of the Chehalis Basin Partnership members could implement parts of the watershed plan as resources allow. (Pros/Cons: There would be no time constraints or formal implementation requirements. Any funding would have to come from Chehalis Basin Partnership members or other sources that would have to be identified. An implementation plan might not be necessary.
A decision on the implementation of the plan should be made soon so that the Partnership does not loose its momentum. It is, however, a defining decision for the Partnership that needs fall consideration.
The next step for the STC in assisting the Partnership.
Now it's the Steering/Technical Committee's turn to ask the Chehalis Basin Partnership
"What do you want the STC to do next?"
The suggestion of the STC is that the Partnership direct the STC to prepare a work plan for August through December to bring back to the Chehalis Basin Partnership. The work plan would describe a process to work through and resolve the issues identified above.
This page created and maintained by Chehalis River Council
Send comments or questions to the: Chehalis River Council