November Land Use Legislator Report

Crescent Peak:   Eolus (the developer) & I overlaid PBO routes and proposed wind generator & sub-station locations.  There are no conflicts other than a few road crossings that will be mitigated in our favor.  Plus we’ll get 2 trailheads with improved access roads to them.  The area will be wind farm or ACEC.  This is a win-win for us and eolus.  I presented this to CC and it was approved as MRAN’s position.

Jean:  MRAN’s position is in support (with specific objections noted in our comments) of alt. 3 of the proposed 2014 & 2018 RMP revisions.  That gives us Jean and Roach dry lake areas.  The Clark Co. Public Land Resolution is an end run around 10 years of public process in favor of developers.  Support of the BLM’s RMP alt. 3 was presented to and approved by CC as MRAN’s position.  Getting to keep the Goodsprings side is not a good trade for losing Jean. Support the proposed BLM RMP revision alt. 3.  Maps att’d.

Accounting:  It’s good to put a monetary value on what it costs to put on a race.  And a check sheet avoids forgot abouts and shows we can do project accounting.  But flagging, riding sweep, or picking up after ourselves are not IN-KIND donations.  In-kind donations apply to improving trails and picking other pees trash.   We can justify $23/hr based NCOHV’s in-kind grant accounting, but justifying entry fees by cost to put on a race entrants may see $23/hr inflated.

Land Use v Legislative Advocacy:  Land use is determined by law.  Laws are passed or changed by the legislative process.  We can participate in the legislative process or adapt to a future made by others.  Unfortunately not enough of us participate beyond voting.  Could recognition or other reward encourage more participation?

Att’d is Oct. legislative report for inclusion in minutes.

 

Thank you.  I look forward to hearing your ideas. SNDO_RMP_OHV_Alternative_03 – comment RA SNDO_RMP_RMA_Alternative_03 LIR 181002

Recent Posts