December 6, 2006
The Badger Interim Oversight Management Commission (IOMC) convened at The Badger Army Ammunition Plant for its eighth regular meeting on Wednesday, December 6, 2006. This meeting had been rescheduled from November 29 th due to weather.
Lance Gurney, interim Chair, called the meeting to order at 6:40 pm.
Commissioners present: Alvin Cloud, Ho-Chunk Nation, Rich Evans, WDNR; and Bill Wenzel, Sauk County.
Liaison representatives present: Rick Walgenbach, U.S. Dairy Forage Research Center, and Joan Kenney, U.S. Army.
Stakeholder representatives present: Laura Olah, Citizens for Safe Water Around Badger; Eugene Robkin, City of Baraboo; Bill Stehling, Village of Sauk City; Verlyn Mueller, Badger History Group; and Karl Hakanson, The Sauk Prairie Conservation Alliance.
Others present: Lance Gurney, Interim Chair, Sauk County Dept. of Planning and Zoning; Dave Tremble, Sauk County Dept. of Planning and Zoning; Craig Karr, Wisconsin DNR, Dean Schwartz, Chair of the Town of West Point, and Donna Stehling.
Gurney asked members to review the agenda. The agenda was approved by consensus.
Dean Schwartz introduced himself to the Commission members and reminded them that there is great interest in the negotiations over Badger from people on the other side of the river.
None
Gurney raised the issue of the role of the Oversight Commission, and asked for Commission input as to how land use and management proposals should be brought to the Commission for review, how that review should be conducted, and what the outcomes of the review process should be. Members discussed the values of the Reuse Plan, and how the parties will collaborate to uphold them, and what level of detail land managers should provide to the Commission. Current discussions over land ownership have yet to be fully resolved before land use planning and restoration work can proceed in full. Members acknowledged that the OMC is not an “approval” body, but should be viewed as a resource whose members have important and useful knowledge and connections that the owners and land managers can utilize. Local expertise is available that may provide better assistance to owners than agency staff or outside experts.
Discussion centered on land uses that cause cross-boundary impacts, and the Reuse Plan value of managing the property as a whole. Some land uses involve impacts that pay no attention to the surveyed boundaries of individual properties. Rich Evans pointed out that many shared concerns will be addressed through the master planning process. The DNR intends to refer to the Reuse Plan as the primary set of guiding principles. The comprehensive master plan will result in a set of proposed land uses and management strategies that won’t need individual Commission review and approval. Others pointed out that some land uses that are currently being implemented or contemplated merit some kind of review, and that the Commission can’t wait until the master plan is complete. Even uses that appear unlikely to cause cross-boundary or negative impacts should be brought to the Commission for discussion, as different perspectives and insights of the Commission members and stakeholders might reveal hidden, unintended consequences that should be avoided.
Gurney returned to the main question: what is the process to be applied to bringing issues before the Commission, reviewing and reporting on them? Members agreed that some kind of structure and application process is needed. Hakanson suggested that hypothetical situations could be proposed for experimental review. Mueller suggested that proposals be emailed to members prior to meetings. Gurney offered to have Sauk County draft a model for Commission review at its next meeting.
Gurney moved to the second item of Old Business, the draft Groundwater Study Resolution. He reported that written comments had been received from representatives of Badger, Citizens for Safe Water Around Badger, and the Wisconsin Wildlife Federation. Gurney asked that any additional editorial comments be forwarded by the end of next week (December 15 th), and that a final version would be forwarded to the local governments for action by the end of January.
Craig Karr briefed members on the status of the DNRs Master Planning process. The Wisconsin DNR has agreed to take a lead role in providing the resources for and coordinating a master planning process that will include all potential owners, stakeholders and public. Craig explained that no decisions had been made by DNR about future uses, although conceptual plans were submitted by DNR to the National Park Service to facilitate their sponsorship of the DNRs request for transfer of BAAP lands to state ownership. He provided a handout that outlined the basic steps of the process, and the anticipated role of the Oversight Management Commission. Craig thought the process might last a year to a year and a half. He said that the original idea had been to start the process following completion of the land transfer; but that he now feels that the process could run parallel with some of the pre-transfer discussion and be completed along with an agreement on the final footprint.
Discussion followed, focusing on the current preliminary planning sessions the parties are engaged in. Craig suggested that the HCN needs to prepare a conceptual land use plan for the BIA, similar to that prepared by DNR for the Park Service, as a component of their application for transfer.
Joan Kenney described the Army’s goal as an agreement on where the exact boundaries will be, but that planning could start whenever the parties are comfortable with a fairly clear general footprint outline. They need word from the GSA on what exactly is required to make that happen. She discussed the difference between a “FOST” (Finding of Suitability to Transfer) and an “ECOP” (Environmental Conditions of Property). The ECOP is similar to the FOST except that it doesn't require the 30 day public review required for a FOST. An ECOP is used in transferring federal property management and ownership responsibilities from one federal agency to another.
Kenney said she is pleased with the efforts put forth by the parties in these preliminary planning sessions to define and resolve issues.
Gurney raised the next item on the New Business agenda, Pine Glen access. He mentioned the importance of Pine Glen (the “ear” projecting off the northern boundary of the BAAP property) as an important cultural gathering place for the settler population. The site has important emotional significance to the Sumpter and Merrimac communities. Public access to the site, following transfer likely to the HCN, would help realize the Reuse Plan’s vision of reconciliation. Alvin cloud mentioned the need to know what access routes are needed, and which roads should be maintained to provide it. He said the tribe has an interest in the medicinal plants in that area as well. The tribe and community need to agree on cooperative uses.
Gurney asked if anyone had Other Issues to discuss. Bill Stehling, Village of Sauk City rep, distributed copies of the original rail easement proposed by GSA, along with a revised version that he had drafted. Stehling mentioned the National Rail Act (NRA) and expressed concern that a permanent rail easement may give WisDOT reason to invoke the heavy-handed provisions of the NRA, which would interfere with the implementation of the Reuse Plan. His draft suggests a sunset clause in the easement that would terminate it if rail use were no longer needed to support the existing local business.
Joan Kenney referred to a letter submitted by the Army to the WDNR regarding fixes to the clay borrow pits on the north end of the property, to alleviate drainage issues and restore the site to a more natural condition. She said she would make copies of the letter available by email. She said their efforts to obtain broad support for the restoration plan worked well.
Craig Karr told the members that DNR is submitting a budget request to Congress for the next Fiscal Year, beginning October 1, 2007. The request would primarily cover infrastructure removal, but asked members to identify other needs that could be incorporated into the request. He described the intent of the request to secure funding that would go to the Army while Spec Pro resources were still on-site, to avoid the need to go through another contract bidding process. DNR has agreed to take the lead on coordinating infrastructure removal site-wide.
Deb Wells, Bluffview Sanitary District, expressed the districts concern about being provided with road access to sanitary treatment facilities. The district prefers access via Gate C, at the s-bend of USH 12. Discussion followed regarding access needs of the parties, and the availability of the red roofed building outside the fence at the main gate.
Gurney outlined next steps, to include the County’s draft of an application process, and members/stakeholder comments on the groundwater study resolution.
Members scheduled the next OMC meeting for Wednesday, January 31, 2007 at 6:30. The meeting will be in building #207.
None
The meeting adjourned by consensus at 8:25 pm.
Respectfully submitted by: Dave Tremble, Sauk county Dept. of Planning and Zoning