NASORLO Board Meeting 1-28-2011
NASORLO Board Meeting, January 28, 2011 1:35PM EST.
Roll Call – Present, Tim Hogsett, TX; Rob Grant, AL; Bob Bronson, IN; David Johnson, VA; Domenic Bravo, WY; Becky Kelley, GA, Gary Thorson,CO; Jay Ziemann, AZ; Pete Finn NY; Susan Moershel DE; Tim Montgomery. Absent – Kris Marek, OK; Sedrick Mitchell CA; Chas Van Genderen, MT; Bryan Kellar AR; A quorum was present.
Minutes: The minutes had been distributed, Thorson moved and Finn seconded a motion to approve as distributed, motion passed.
Fiscal Report for the 2010 Annual Conference. Eiken addressed the 2010 Annual Conference fiscal summary ( attached ). He reported revenues of $7,467.91 and current expenses of $11,567.21. He reported that he had not been contacted about reimbursement for Mickey Fearn, so we should consider this report as unofficial.
2010 Fiscal Summary Eiken then reviewed the 2010 NASORLO fiscal summary document sent out previously to the Board. This document showed an available balance of unencumbered funds of $ 104,263.19. NASORLO revenues, which included dues from 35 states and territories of $ 42,698.60 and total expenditures of $ 45,884.40. The difference could be attributed to the deficit created by the annual conference. The expenditures were 74.31 percent of the total budgeted for the year. Eiken pointed out the Executive Director line item was considerably under the budget, but that as part of the contract between NASORLO and Eiken, President Hogsett had agreed to pay more of the communications bills which Eiken had been paying. Therefore, there is an overage in the telephone and communications line item, and less in the Exec. Director line item. He noted that the 2011 Budget acknowledged some of these changes and that it would more accurately reflect the NASORLO budget for this year. Other corrections were noted by the Board concerning the dates listed in line 13 and for the Total, which had a 2009 date and were corrected to 2010.
Audit Review. Eiken reported that the reports necessary to do the audit review had been completed but they had not been delivered to a CPA for the review. He indicated the review would be done for presentation at the March Board meeting.
IRS Status Eiken had opinions from 2 CPA’s that NASORLO did NOT need to file with the IRS annually, because all revenues come from state sources and therefore, by IRS rules, it appears we are acting in place of the states. But to make sure, he contacted the IRS for a determination in November. He has not heard from them and will follow up and report on the determination for the March Board meeting.
State Data Sheet Project: President Hogsett explained that NRPA had asked NASORLO to consider partnering with them, NGA and NASPD in a project to produce four page data sheets on each state, related to the values and benefits of stateside L&WCF projects. NASORLO had provided NRPA with a $ 10,000 grant in 2006 to produce a similar product. In 2006 the partnership included the Outdoor Equipment Manufacturers of America. Eiken thought that NRPA paid half and we paid half. ( Addendum and correction. Reviewing the files it appears NRPA oversaw the production, and the Outdoor Equipment Manufacturers and NRPA delivered them to Congressional members and NASORLO provided them with all the funds to do this. ) NRPA had approached us again about our ability to partner in an effort to do the same thing in 2011. Executive Director Eiken indicated that originally the idea was to prioritize 25 of the key states and produce those first, but that it was anticipated that all 50 states would have their own data sheet produced. He also reminded the Board that the data collected for each state would need involvement from the NASORLO representative, as information needed to be collected, reviewed and key projects identified for each state. They had originally thought these items could be produced for a similar $ 10,000 amount and that each partner would contribute an equal share, or $ 2,500.
Eiken indicated that these materials would be produced with a special section on economic impact, individualized for each state. He indicated the states would need to provide information and review each state data sheet for accuracy. Moershel noted the costs listed did not include the cost to the states of providing the information. Eiken agreed and noted that state SLO’s would play an important part in producing the information for these publications.
Beth Strobridge of NGA indicated that they would not likely get permission to fund any portion of the project, but that she would check on it. Eiken indicated that he thought the NASPD budget was stretched with their strong commitment to a DC presence and therefore they may have some difficulty coming up with the required funds and that maybe NASORLO could participate at a higher level to compensate for this situation. Hogsett added that maybe NASORLO could upfront some of the funds for NASPD until such time as their budget improved. Eiken indicated that if NASORLO did commit to the partnership, it was likely that 5 – 6 thousand dollars could be found within the existing budget to participate.
After a lengthly discussion, Kelly indicated that there did not seem to be enough information on this project to commit funds at this time. And she lacked a big picture view of this effort to see how it fit into a larger program of advocacy for the stateside. Without this information, her decision would be to delay making a decision and committing NASORLO funds until more is known. There may be other more important items to place NASORLO assets…. Moershel said this effort might be the core piece for a larger effort, but without knowing what other items are needed and prioritize these efforts, it would be difficult to make a decision now. Hogsett indicated it is unfortunate that this discussion was not held at our annual meeting, so the these questions could have been addressed and the materials completed and ready for use at the March Legislative Forum.
Kelly said that if these items could be developed and placed in a data base, each state could print their own data sheets and distribute them. Moershel indicate we should get the digital files, once they are complete, so in the future we can use them.
President Hogsett asked David Johnson to explain what materials Virginia had developed to present to their delegation. Johnson said they had met with Rep. Kantor’s staff and delivered a L&WCF overview, allocations of the program, letter from their Governor to Congress and a copy of the letter sent to OMB from the stateside coalition members. He indicated it was well received and, in response to a question from Eiken, indicated he would not have a problem if these materials were distributed to the membership as examples of what states might consider in developing information for their delegations. Eiken indicated he would send the materials to the Board.
President Hogsett indicated the consensus seem to be that there are many unanswered questions about this project and that NASORLO delay the decision on commitment to this page at this time, but that we still are interested in the project. Timing of the completion and use of the materials is a key question that needs to be addressed. He asked Eiken to contact NRPA and that he would be willing to be on a conference call, if we needed a decision before the March Board meeting.
DC Representative President Hogsett described a contact that he and Exec. Dir. Eiken had with Tom Wolfe, who is the NASPD Washington DC liaison to see if he was interested in taking on NASORLO as an add on to his responsibilities. He indicated we had met with him in Santa Fe and asked if he would be interested in this. He said he would. So Eiken and Hogsett developed a list of topics to consider as NASORLO tasks to do on our behalf in DC. The general list of tasks are as follows:
- Monitor Legislation and report
- Do research, as requested, for NASORLO
- Prepare a weekly or bi-weekly report
- Represent NASORLO at key meetings
- Work with NASORLO to expand the stateside coalition
- Be a NASORLO resource for members visiting DC
- Meet monthly with NPS grants staff and report
After a conference call with Wolfe, we asked him to look at the list and tell us which tasks he would be willing to perform for the 5-6 thousand dollars we had available for support of the L&WCF. When he responded later, he felt he would only be able to commit to number 7 for this amount and indicated costs for DC representation are quite high. Eiken and Hogsett reviewed the Wolfe response and told him that any commitment to a DC presence for NASORLO would likely be deferred until the March Board meeting. In addition, with all the changes and delays dictated by the new Congress, it was likely more would be known about the specific issues and needs of the organization later. We indicated to Wolfe that we might discuss this with him further, but after we had time to assess the situation facing the organization.
NASORLO Web Page: Eiken indicated that he had contacted a person to give us a proposal about putting together a basic web site for the organization. He had told her to look at the NPS, NARRP and NASPD website to get some idea what models might work for the organization. Finn commented that it would be good to have a site where basic materials and policies of the organization could be found and used as a reference when in discussions with the Administration, Congress or our own state governments. Eiken indicated that the Executive Director would likely be the site administrator, but that the consultant indicated she would be available for redesign or update of the website, as needed. In addition, he had asked her to create a site where individual information for each state could be reviewed, accessed and updated by the state agencies. He indicated that this person was asked to be available on a conference call in March to discuss the design and content with the Board. Eiken asked Hogsett and the Board if there would be any objection to spend 5 – 6 hundred dollars to pay for the initial mock up of the website for the March meeting. Being no objection, he indicated he had enough of a consensus to proceed and would place the item on the March Board meeting.
Report on the 2011 Conference President Hogsett reference the email from Susan Moershel about the logistics for the annual conference in Wilmington, DE in September and indicated that she had asked him for assistance to set up the program for the conference. Since Board members Kelly and Montgomery had indicated they would assist on the Program committee, along with Hogsett and Eiken, he wanted the committee to work with her on developing a theme for the conference and on the program. Moershel discussed the work that she faced, both within her agency and with the meeting logistics and felt that the Committee would need to be quite active in assisting her. She said, with the growing demands on their budget, and the signs from other states about budget shortfalls, that she was concerned that there would be limited attendance. And she feared moving too aggressively right now and committing lodging and meeting site costs, without knowing whether or not it was likely the conference would be held. Montgomery asked for a straw poll of Board members who would send someone to the NPS annual training in Utah. President Hogsett indicated he had talked to Wayne Strum today and Wayne had indicated NPS was likely to cancel that training session.
Board Meeting dates for 2011. The following dates were tentatively presented to the Board. The only one adopted was the March meeting, with the others being tentative only. President Hogsett indicated that we will have conference call available for the March Board meeting and those who can attend in person, be sure to extend any travel dates to ensure participation. Eiken said he would send out a draft agenda for the meeting with a survey of the Board. He asked the Board to set aside these dates for possible Board meetings.
March 18, 2011 – Baltimore, DE
June 24, 2011 – Conference Call
Sept. 22, 2011 – Annual Meeting – Wilmington, DE
November 17, 2011 – Conference Call
Other: DOI Apportionment Certificate. President Hogsett said that, in a conversation with Wayne Strum of the NPS, Strum told him that 1/12 monthly is accuring every month so that there are funds for distribution under the Congressional continuing resolution. Moershel said that we need an Apportionment Certificate signed and that should be on the March Board agenda. Hogsett indicated Strum said it would be unlikely the Secretary would sign that letter this year, until after Congress acted on the Resolution.
Eiken indicated that Joe Dias in Rhode Island had sent out an email saying that Sen. Reed from his state is the Chair of the Senate Appropriations sub-committee for Interior and this fact, along with the close connections and support of Virginia and Rep. Kantor puts the stateside in a favorable position to at least be recognized and heard during the upcoming budget negotiations. And even if we could not see an increase in the stateside, maybe our pitch for equity would resonate enough to at least protect the stateside from disproportionate reductions.
Adjournment: Being no further business, President Hogsett asked for a motion to adjourn. Moershel moved and Kelly seconded such a motion, motion passed at 2:48 PM EST.
