Pima County Science Commission Meeting
Water Resources Research Center
Monday, January 12, 2004
DRAFT MEETING MINUTES


Members Present:
Bill Shaw
Paul Fish
Bob Steidl
Tom Sheridan
E. Linwood Smith
Frances Werner
Mac Donaldson
Jonathan Mabry


Members Absent:
Joseph Joaquin
Dan Robinett
Don McGann


Others Present:
Carolyn Campbell, Coalition for Sonoran Desert Protection
Jim Barry, Pima County Administrators Office
Maeveen Behan, Pima County Administrators Office
John Regan, Pima County Department of Transportation, GIS
Jim Veomett, Pima County Planning
Lori Godoshian, Pima County Clerk of the Board
David Cushman, Pima County Cultural Resources
Julia Fonseca, Pima County Flood Control District
Lori Woods, RECON


Open Meeting Law
Lori Godoshian, Pima County Clerk of the Board, presented information about the Open Meeting Law. It was stated that draft minutes for meetings must be available within 3 days of the meeting. A quorum consists of 6 members. It was suggested to tape meetings. Commission members need to have materials 24 hrs in advance. Agenda must be posted 24 hrs in advance. Lori Godoshian mentioned that minutes of the meetings must be approved. They are permanent records of the meetings. The use of email to discuss items is discouraged. No more than 6 members may participate except for setting meeting dates. Teleconference must be posted 24 hrs in advance, and described as such. Nicole Fyffe posts for the Commission meetings; currently, the Pima County Administration Building is the official site.

Bond Update
Carolyn Campbell presented on the upcoming bond issues. The January 20th Board of Supervisors meeting will decide on the timing of the bond and questions. At the polls, there will be 6 questions voters will say yes or no to.
• $20M cultural resource packaged with parks and recreation, for a total of $80M.
• Friends of the Sonoran Desert are raising money to promote open space bonds.
• Community open space priorities are parcel specific; habitat protection priorities are described as seven target areas per AOLT/TNC.
Negotiations with land owners will precede sale of bonds. Easements cannot be condemned and will be part of the program.

Frances Werner suggested sale of bonds in small increments. Jim Barry will pass the suggestion on.

Carolyn Campbell mentioned that $127M for Section 10 habitat protection seems low to the Coalition.


Informational Forum
Jim Barry discussed the possibility of the Commission holding an informational forum. Barry thinks this Commission cannot advocate voting for open space bonds. Individuals can advocate as individuals. County staff cannot advocate. Non-county entities can advocate, if registered. Maeveen Behan does not believe the Commission can hold an informational forum, while Jim Barry stated that County Attorney advice was needed.

Bill Shaw and Commission members requested background information on how commission was formed and how ideas were developed. Maeveen Behan will provide facts about the process, how many meetings have been held, and background information relative to the bond committee.


PAG Activities Related to SOER
PAG has begun to compile regional information on building permits issued by all jurisdictions. The impetus for this has been for transportation and planning.

Julia Fonseca showed displays of development permits issued between January 2000 to June 2003. The Commission requested that the poster displays be overlaid with priority lands for SDCP acquisition, and overlaid for compliance with archeological resources. Another overlay showing how much land was undeveloped vs. infill was also requested.


Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan Update
Maeveen Behan presented a Sonoran Desert Conservation Plan update for the Commission members. The big news was that the draft MSCP is ready for review. Before next Tuesday, CHH wants to release a complete draft MSCP and open up a public comment period. The MSCP is 2 volumes, and includes 6 documents in the Appendix including the PVS report and an SDCP summary. A draft will be sent out to the Commission. The document has not been released to the USFWS, and is not a decision document for the BOS. It was mentioned that one of the different aspects of the plan is how it empowers the local land use plan.

The USFWS lost in court on the no surprises policy; the court struck it down. Therefore, it has to be re-noticed. The question will arise, why get a permit? The USFWS will fast track renotice of no surprises Maeveen expects it to be completed prior to issuance of our Section 10 permit. The Bush administration wants the no surprises policy.

The MSCP covers a 30-year take period. The buildout estimation looks forward 50 yrs, but take is broken into 10-year estimates. There are milestones so that take does not get ahead of protection and mitigation.

Concerns with the adequacy of monitoring in the MSCP were brought up. Land acquisition will be the primary mitigation measure for the MSCP. Monitoring for the MSCP is relatively easy compared to overall SDCP monitoring.


State of the Environment Report
Action was deferred on this item.

Next Meeting
The next Science Commission meeting has been set for Monday, February 9th from 9-11am. The meeting will be held in the Water Resources Research Center conference room.