theSheetNews.com

Council taps Measure U for air subsidy 

The definition of bankruptcy found on the Investopedia website is as follows: A legal proceeding involving a person or business that is unable to repay outstanding debts.

Apparently, however, bankruptcy can’t prevent the Town of Mammoth Lakes from incurring new debt.

Mammoth’s Town Council voted unanimously at a special meeting Wednesday night to borrow money in order to pay for this year’s summer/fall air service subsidy to Alaska Airlines.

Who will lend the Town the money for this purpose?

Well, um, we’re gonna loan ourselves the money. Out of Measure U funds we’re gonna collect between now and the time the payment’s due to Alaska in February. Then we’re gonna pay ourselves back sometime next summer once the 2013-2014 budget cycle begins.

But as Councilman Rick Wood said Wednesday, this isn’t another one of those phony loans of the past (see the Town’s history of General Fund loans to the Airport Enterprise Fund), but rather, a real loan.

Really.

And, he insisted, this is a “non precedent-setting action.”

Hey bartender, how about a sudsiby? 

The traditional partners in the summer/fall air subsidy program have been the Town, Mono County and Mammoth Mountain.

Mammoth Mountain has been solely responsible for the winter subsidy.

The following represent the shares each partner paid in 2010 and 2011, according to Mammoth Lakes Tourism Executive Director John Urdi:

2010 2011

Town $272K $340K

MMSA $274K $424K

County $45K $85K

This year, the proposed dollar amounts Urdi had listed for each partner were as follows:

This letter was emailed to the Mammoth Lakes Town Council and Staff, as well as the Measure U Committee members by Mammoth Lakes Foundation President and CEO Evan Russell in anticipation of the Town Council meeting tonight to further discuss using Measure U funds to subsidize air service. See previous story by clicking here. Tonight’s meeting will begin at 5 p.m. in Suite Z.

To the Measure U Committee and Town Council:

I am a big supporter of air service to our community and understand the need for future business. The issue you are addressing is not about air service, it’s about public TRUST. We asked the voters to trust us and tax themselves for very specific purposes (see the Argument in Favor of Measure U below). This argument appeared on the ballot. Air service was taken off the table for Measure U consideration at one of the early town council meetings or workshops. It was never discussed again as being part of Measure U.

As a member of the Measure U Campaign Committee, I have recently been contacted or stopped in the grocery store numerous times by angry people in the community whom we encouraged to vote for Measure U. The general comments go along the lines of I would not have voted for Measure U if I knew it was  going to be used for a different purpose; I told you the town would take it over; and your committee lied to the voters.

We asked the community to TRUST us when we proposed Measure U and asked for a tax that would support local initiatives like parks, trails, local transit, arts and cultural programs, better pedestrian use, etc. AIR SERVICE WAS NEVER MENTION AS AN OPTION IN ANY PUBLIC MEETING WE ATTENDED. Staff had ample opportunity to suggest this be included. The staff report submitted on July 3^rd for a July 4^th meeting is unconscionable, has absolutely no transparency, was done in secret (Measure U committee had many public meetings where this could have been discussed ), and borders on public corruption.

Over the years, the Town has received a lot of well-meaning bad advice which have led to the problems we have today. If you approve the staff recommendation to take Measure U funds for air service subsidy, it will be the biggest tax fraud the voters and tax payers have ever seen. If you want to bring a tax initiative forward for air service, do it in full open and public view, not behind closed doors. To write a seventeen page report you spring on the community at the last minute has obviously been in the works for a long time. I have no idea what recourse the community has, but here’s what I have heard and been threatened by:

-Another law suit (if you remember a very angry LA attorney/2^nd homeowner wrote many letters criticizing Measure U as an unfair tax).

-Repeal of Measure U so it goes away completely

-A Grand Jury investigation

-More bad national coverage, this may have more impact than the law suit and water issue

-Impact on future bond issues or tax initiatives; it will be extremely difficult to pass any school bonds or parcel taxes where you need the voters’ approval

ARGUMENT IN FAVOR OF MEASURE U

This is what the voters thought they were voting for

Measure U will fund year-round mobility infrastructure such as enhanced trolley service, winter maintenance of pedestrian walk-ways, and enhanced bus shelters; partner in the construction and operation of the Mammoth Track project and implementation of Mammoth’s Trail System Master Plan; and serve as a critical component supporting culture and performing arts in Mammoth Lakes.

Measure U will fund these critical efforts without raising taxes. Because Measure U requires a two-thirds vote to pass, Measure U funds can only be used for specific purposes detailed in this initiative. Measure U is for US, the people who live and work in the Town of Mammoth-That’s why so many local organizations, businesses, and community leaders are strongly supporting Measure U.

Revenue from Measure U

• ·         Will be spent specifically on mobility, recreation, and arts and culture projects;
• ·         Will require annual audits to ensure Measure U funds are being used appropriately;
• ·         Will maintain year round pedestrian infrastructure, enhance local transit opportunities, build enhanced bus shelters, and fund public transit for special events;
• ·         Will help fund the Mammoth Track project;
• ·         Will help fund the implementation of SHARP (Sherwins Area Recreation Plan);
• ·         Will help fund additional signage to enhance the Mammoth Lakes Trail system;
• ·         Will help fund on-going operations and maintenance of cultural & performing arts facilities;
• ·         Will only be used to benefit the Town of Mammoth Lakes;
• ·         Will not supplant Town funding already committed to Mobility, Recreation and Arts and Culture;
• ·         Will not go into the General Fund;
• ·         Will not raise taxes;

Unlike other communities throughout California, we have an opportunity to fund local Mobility, Recreation, and Arts & Cultural projects without raising taxes. Please join us in Voting YES on Mammoth’s Measure U.

Thank You for listening,
Evan Russell

Last week, Mammoth’s Measure U Steering/Application Committee met to review the pilot awards process, but also to discuss opportunities for applications that weren’t fully funded during the initial recommendations in light of additional money that will be accrued through the end of June. The Committee had $653,215 in Measure U funding to spread around, nowhere near enough to meet the $1.16 million in total requests submitted by the eight applicants. Particularly interested in the second chance: Mammoth Lakes’ Events Coalition, a consortium of new and veteran events, which asked for $88,600 and got $59,215 of that. MLEC argues that many of their events are proven generators of tax and other revenue, which the Town can tap into sooner rather than later. Town Council previously sent back the recommendations list for more work. The Committee opted to wait until the current Measure R funding cycle is complete, and plans to meet again on June 13 regarding additional Measure U funding.

But who got it? Answer: Mammoth Track runs away with top prize

If you’ve ever seen the movie “Dead Poets Society,” then you might recall a scene early in the picture in which Robin Williams’ English Literature class discusses the merits (or lack thereof) of coldly calculating the mathematical importance of a poem by using the Pritchard Scale.

The scale didn’t go over that well in the film, and a similar attempt at ranking the applicants didn’t work much better for the Mammoth Lakes’ Measure U Steering/Application Committee during its application evaluations on Monday.

Town Recreation Manager Stuart Brown said there was $653,215 in Measure U funding available, a little more than previously estimated, but still nowhere near enough to meet the $1.16 million in total requests submitted by the eight applicants.

In just under four hours, this is what the Committee decided:

A request for $15,000 from the Mammoth Lakes Chamber of Commerce for ancillary street-side Fourth of July programming was deemed too vague and came away empty-handed.

Conversely, a request from the Town and the Eastern Sierra Transit Authority to augment transit service for many summer events received its full $24,000 request.

Other events were pegged for some portion of their original request amounts. The Mammoth Lakes Events Coalition’s Summer Arts & Culture request was deliberated in terms of how much micromanagement the Committee was inclined to exert on the band of 9 veteran and new projects. One thought was funding some, and not funding others, but that was countered by opinions that those decisions should be left to the MLEC group.

Ultimately it was decided that the funding would be recommended as an aggregate of the individual event rankings, and score sheets would be turned over to the MLEC for use in apportioning the funds to the various events. Also discussed but later abandoned was a concept for creating an oversight committee to monitor the MLEC’s decision making, in favor of a more straightforward Memorandum of Understanding with the group.

The ask? $88,600. The give: $59,215.

An ask from the Town for $127,000 in grant matches yielded only $20,000 in recommendations.

That was for a grant that came in after the Town’s budget had been completed.

Committee members John Wentworth, Rich Boccia and John Vereuck expressed concerns about supplanting, since Public Works’ Ray Jarvis said there is already grant match money in the Transportation budget.

In other words, the Town had already budgeted the grant match money but was hoping it could take whatever it could from U and then use the savings to backfill elsewhere – i.e. supplant.

The Mammoth Lakes Foundation’s request for $85,000 for the Repertory Theatre was reduced to $40,000, with $15,000 to be spent on improvements and the rest spent on hiring Artistic Director Shira Dubrovner full-time.

A $60,000 request for a Cultural & Sports Events Feasibility Study was knocked back to $30,000. Committee member Jim Smith said he sees the study as helping plan for building. Bill Taylor, however, indicated it takes a village. “A consultant can say your options are A, B and C, but without an involved, community-driven organization, it’s just a worthless piece of paper,” he opined.

Committee Chair Bill Sauser echoed that view somewhat, saying he’s “sick of seeing studies sitting on Town shelves,” though he did think that Measure U funding was at least appropriate for the study. Joyce Turner emphasized a pressing need for it, pointing out that the Town has several events locations (i.e. Sam’s Woodsite) that are in danger of being sold or otherwise lost as stable venues.

The Recreation Department got recommended for half of its $60,000 request to establish summer activities, such as skating programs, for the Multi-Use Facility, which in the winter serves as the Ice Rink.

And the Committee debated the High Sierra Striders’ Mammoth Track Project request for $523,000, nearly 90% of the total Measure U funding available. Most Committee members agreed that recommending full funding was a non-starter, and that the project has access to more financial outlets than do most of the other applicants. The rub between it being seen as a “game changer” for the area economy versus Town Council’s stated goal of return on investment sooner rather than later ultimately led to a modest reduction in recommended funding to $450,000.

The Town’s requests for the Multi-Use Facility and Feasibility Study, as well as the Whitmore Track Project are also eligible for Measure R funding. Town Council will take up the recommendations during its May 16 meeting.

Measure U Committee hears “test” presentations

The Measure U Steering/Application Committee met Monday morning in Suite Z, and heard presentations from eight applicants, all hopeful they’ll receive a slice of the approximately $600,000, collected as a tax on local gas, phone and power bills since the measure took effect on July 1, 2011.

Approved by two-thirds of Mammoth voters in June 2010, the Mammoth Lakes Utility Users Tax, or Measure U, extended a 2.5% Utility Users Tax, and restricts the use of funds to Mobility, Recreation, and Arts & Culture.

The Committee is made up of civic and business leaders, including Mammoth Unified School District Superintendent Rich Boccia, Mammoth Mountain Ski Area’s Jim Smith, Bill Taylor, John Vereuck, Joyce Turner, John Wentworth, Mobility Commission Chair Sandy Hogan and Recreation Commission Chair Bill Sauser.

The Felici Trio’s Rebecca Hang was the designated spokesperson for the 9-member Mammoth Lakes Events Coalition (MLEC) for Summer Arts and Culture Special Events.

Hang said the member events attract more than 60,000 guests each summer.

On hand were MLEC members Maya Weinhart with Mammoth Food & Wine, Ken and Flossie Coulter for the Jazz Jubilee, Brian Schuldt representing the Mammoth Lakes Chamber Music Festival, Cathleen Calderon with Villagefest, Gaye Mueller for the Kids Fishing Festival, Sierra Summer Festival co-organizer and musician Pete Watercott, Mammoth Lakes Chamber’s Brent Truax for Mammoth Rocks, former Mammoth Rocks organizer Mark Deeds, who previewed his new Mammoth Wing & Swing event and also spoke for Dan Lehman’s Bluegrass festival.

The Bluesapalooza festival is a member of the MLEC, but was not represented, as it has requested no Measure U dollars.

The MLEC’s cumulative request was for $88,600.

Their events, say members, generate $1.6 million in economic activity.

“The Coalition addresses the Town’s triple-bottom line and would boost community morale in no small way,” Hang pitched.

With some Coalition events having been in existence longer than others, some only entering their first year in 2012, Hang explained that the business plan tried to be more generous to new organizations, which can request up to 30%, whereas more established events can ask for up to 10% of the total.

Committee member Jim Smith wanted to know what is MLEC’s expectation of the Committee. “If you don’t get the entire 88,600, will some be excluded, or will you fight it out amongst yourselves?” he asked. “There won’t be any fighting,” Hang responded. “Since this is a new thing, a ‘trial run,’ [the MLAC] came to an internal agreement that lesser amounts will be prorated.”

Would a new event, such as Wing & Swing, even happen without Measure U? “Without seed funding, chances of the event happening would be minimal,” Deeds replied.

While Wing & Swing, which would incorporate both food and music components, is still in the conceptual stages, Dan Lehman’s Bluegrass festival is further along in terms of funding, lining up venue, talent and other aspects for the show, which is targeting the weekend following Mammoth Rocks, coinciding with Mammoth Brewing Company’s Hop & Sage Festival.

Should funding be awarded, Town contracts are expected to be written with the individual events, though a single, umbrella budget incorporating all 9 events would be turned over to the Committee. Feedback surveys for attendees would be standardized across all 9 events to gather statistics for use next year.

Town Recreation Manager Stu Brown, who’s facilitating much of the Measure U process, said this pilot round of funding might not be encumbered against any future funding cycles, since none exist at this time.

Also in the running for Measure U dollars: the High Sierra Striders on behalf of the Mammoth Track Project, which is considered something of a long shot, asking for nearly all the available funding pool amount in its request. Striders representative Elaine Smith, wife of Committee member Jim Smith, said corporate sponsorship is running below expectation and the cost of installation is running above.

The Mammoth Lakes Foundation, on behalf of the Mammoth Lakes Repertory Theatre, asked for funding in part to make Artistic Director Shira Dubrovner a full-time employee. Mammoth’s Chamber of Commerce added a separate ask for its July 4 events. The Eastern Sierra Transit Authority and the Town asked for subsidies to cover “enhanced” Trolley operation across the summer season of events. The Town also asked for funding for a Cultural & Sporting events feasibility study, a Public Works Transportation Construction Grant match, and Summer Programming and Operations funding for the Multi-Use Facility, which in the winter is also known as the Ice Rink.

“Let’s get some roller disco going,” Mammoth Recreation’s Stephanie Daniels quipped good-naturedly.

According to the Town’s website, Measure U funds do not need to be spent each year. If none of the applications submitted in the funding cycle align with goals of the Town or through the prioritization process are not determined as ‘top tier’, then funds might not be awarded. Recommendations might also be made for partial funding for any request, and do not have to represent the entire pool of funding available during any given cycle.

Wentworth suggested streamlining the Measure U reporting process prior to completing the funding cycle, noting that Measure R has a very specific reporting process.

The Steering/Application Committee will take up evaluations during its next regular meeting next Monday, May 7, at 9 a.m. in Suite Z. Council is expected to act on any final recommendations during its May 16 meeting.

It was a big night for recreation at Wednesday’s Mammoth Lakes Town Council meeting, but it ended in confusion.

Following the adoption of the Parks and Recreation Master Plan and the approval of a resolution to establish and formalize a high level of interagency cooperation with the United States Forest Service to plan, design, implement, construct, operate, maintain and promote an integrated year-round trail network, things got a little fuzzy.

Council discussed the Mammoth Lakes Recreation Commission’s recommendations for the fall 2011 Measure R award cycle. The confusion arose when it came time for Council to take a vote. Recreation Commissioners believed that if Council approved their recommendations, it would not only be approving dollar amounts for projects but also a 5-year commitment to the Mammoth Lakes Trail System for a minimum of $300,000 per year from Measure R.

Commissioners and the public became confused when Council explained that it was not approving (or denying) the MLTS (Mammoth Lakes Trails System) commitment that night.

“We haven’t said yes, but we haven’t said no,” Mayor Jo Bacon explained to The Sheet on Thursday. “We’ll discuss it during upcoming budget deliberations which will give the committee time to determine what projects the first year’s $300,000 would be used for.”

The committee Bacon referred to is the Mammoth Lakes Trail System Coordinating Committee (MLTSCC). Earlier in the evening Council had approved a motion that included directing the Town Manager and Recreation Commission to “present a proposal to the Town Council for the formation and convening of the ‘Mammoth Lakes Trail System Coordinating Committee.’”

By approving the fall Measure R project awards (outside of the $300,000 proposed commitment to the MLTS), Council also officially appropriated $6,900 to staff the MLTSCC.

So the committee will form, and then discuss projects that the first year’s $300,000 would fund. That discussion will then be integrated in the upcoming budget process.

Recreation Commissioners were still baffled that the MLTS commitment was not included in the approvals Wednesday night. At least three of them, Bill Sauser, Teri Stehlik and Pat Agnitch, who were present at Wednesday’s meeting, had been under the impression that the recommendations before Council included the MLTS commitment. So by approving the Commission’s recommendations, Council should have approved the commitment to the MLTS.

Commissioner Agnitch even made a specific effort to point out that the Commission had taken two votes at its Jan. 19 meeting where it made its recommendations. The first, which passed 6-0, was to approve the Measure R projects that were listed in Table 1 of the Council’s packet and to recommend the resolution also in the packet. The second vote was regarding the MLTS commitment. It had passed 5-1, with Agnitch dissenting because she believed the process should be reviewed on an annual basis, not given a 5-year commitment.

Council only took action on that first vote Wednesday night.

The next step will be for the MLTSCC to form, finalize its membership and then make recommendations to the Recreation Commission and Town Council regarding projects for the MLTS, including a five-year capital and minor project list, prioritization, schedule and annual budget for the MLTS.

One member of the public, Donnette Huselton, again voiced concern over earmarking future Measure R funding before knowing what other projects might apply to the fund in the future.

“Donnette Huselton was concerned that we are circumventing the Measure R process [by syncing up the MLTS with the Town budget process] and that’s exactly what we’re doing because we are making trails a priority,” Bacon added on Thursday.

Briefs

Deb Pierrel of Intellectual Equity Resort Consulting Group, and Joyce Turner officially handed over the budget-formatting tool they helped develop over the past two years to the Town of Mammoth on Wednesday night. The new format is expected to make budget data easier to read and digest, or as Councilmember Skip Harvey described it, “We now have a ‘Skip-friendly’ budget.”

Council, at the advice of Town Attorney Andrew Morris, deferred awarding a contract for a Town Yard Lighting Retrofit Project until the bidding process was reviewed. One of the bidders, Martin Kleinbard raised concerns with what he described as discrepancies with the process. He claimed he had been trying to do his due diligence while putting together his bid and had asked several questions of Town staff but had not received a response for two months. He also claimed that the bidder who was selected had an “inside scoop” on the project because the bidder had previously worked on a portion of the project. Morris will review the process and bring back a determination at Council’s Feb. 15 meeting.

After months of deliberation, the Mammoth Lakes Recreation Commission finalized its recommendations for the Fall 2011 Measure R award cycle on Jan. 19.

The Commission came to a 5-1 consensus to send the following recommendations to the Town Council. Commissioner Pat Agnitch was the dissenting commissioner. The Council will review and take action on the recommendations at its Feb. 1 regular meeting according to Town Recreation Manager Stuart Brown.

Monies were recommended for the Trails End Park, the Meadow Creek Path grant match, recreation programming enhancements (specifically gymnastics and a tennis backboard), the Mammoth Lakes Trail System coordinating committee, Whitmore Pool enhancements, and Community Center Tennis Court rehabilitation.

The total of these recommendations is $355,350. The remaining Measure R fall funds had already been earmarked for the Mammoth Lakes Trail System completion of the Town’s component, the Mammoth Track Project, maintenance to the bike rack project and the signage and wayfinding projects, and the Town’s administration fee for the Measure R process.

The entire total for the Measure R fall funding recommendations comes to $718,094.

Some of the funding recommendations, if approved by Council, would be broken up between the 2011/12 and the 2012/13 fiscal years, Brown explained. For example, the Commission recommended that the Trails End Park receive $300,000, but only $100,000 of that amount would be part of an amendment to the 2011/12 budget while the remaining $200,000 would be part of the 2012/13 budget.

Included in the Commission’s recommendations was the push to earmark up to $300,000 of Measure R funds each year for the Mammoth Lakes Trail System. An application was submitted in this fall process not for any money from the fall award, but just for the Commission to begin to consider the idea of this process.

“The idea was put out there in the fall process in order to have time to consider it and get it into this year’s budget cycle,” Brown explained of the application.

The goal is to have up to $300,000 of Measure R money earmarked and included in the Town’s budget cycle so that the MLTS does not have to submit an application each year.

Some members of the community have questioned the validity of doing this and are concerned about Mammoth Lakes Trails and Public Access’ ties to the process.

After taking into account the public concern the Commission, minus Agnitch, recommended that this process be approved for a five year time period with an annual review. Agnitch preferred that the process only be approved for one year at this time, which is why she voted against the recommendations, according to Brown.

If Council approves the bundle of recommendations on Wednesday, the $300,000 earmark would enter into this year’s budget process, which will be kicking off in the next few weeks.

Measure R applicants that did not receive the Commission’s recommendation were the Gateway Monument Community Project and a Special Events Feasibility study that had been withdrawn by Town staff.

If recommended by the Mammoth Lakes Recreation Commission and approved by Mammoth’s Town Council in the upcoming Measure R Spring Award cycle, the Mammoth Lakes Trail System (MLTS) would jump to the front of the line for every Measure R award for the next five years.

That’s the way local resident Donnette Huselton saw the request for an annual earmarked allocation of Measure R dollars of up to $300,000 for the MLTS at Tuesday’s Recreation Commission meeting.

Town Manager Dave Wilbrecht agreed that was what he was recommending.

According to the staff report and as previously reported by The Sheet, “The application as it stands … is to encumber $300,000 of Measure R funds annually beginning July 1, 2012 for a period of 5 years.”

The report went on to say that “If approved by Town Council, the $300,000 would be budgeted as a line-item — funds remain in the Measure R fund until approved by Town Council — with no need for the Town or proponent to submit a Measure R funding request during the 5-year time period.”

Huselton was concerned that the Recreation Commission was going to encumber so much of the Measure R funds before the actual money was even in its possession, that soon there would be nothing new left to award.

Huselton’s concerns may have derived from a review of the current award allocation. For the Fall 2011 Measure R award (Rec Commission recommendations are due Jan. 19), the Town has approximately $366,000 to hand out. Overall, however, the Measure R fund for January through September 2011, which is what comprises the fall award dollars, received approximately $785,000, according to Town Recreation Manager Stuart Brown.

The difference in what the Town actually has to award and what the Town actually received from the Measure R sales tax comes from previous financial commitments that had already encumbered the funds.

According to Brown, once the 2011 fall award cycle is completed, the Measure R fund will no longer be encumbered (because Town commitments to projects  like the Whitmore Track will be satisfied). If the MLTS contract were approved in spring, however, that new commitment would shave off up to $300,000 each year from the Measure R fund before other awards are considered.

Gateway not for R

The Recreation Commission also went over several revisions to the Fall Measure R application list. Of note was the dramatic increased request for funding for the Gateway Monument from $25,000 to $250,000. Gateway Monument project leader Elizabeth Tenney was on hand to explain her thinking.

“I bumped up the request [in a letter to staff dated Jan. 4] to make the point of how important the gateway is,” Tenney said. “To put an exclamation point on the project.”

Tenney explained that even though she has received a lot of in-kind support for the project, her original estimate of needing $100,000 in actual cash may have been low.

“After reviewing the numbers it looks like it is going to be more like $0.35 on the dollar not $0.20,” she said.

She reiterated the importance of the monument, especially as the Town moves closer to a settlement or perhaps bankruptcy with Mammoth Lakes Land Acquisition (Hot Creek).

“We need to show that we are still strong and that we are open for business,” Tenney said. “We want to get everyone’s attention [in a positive way].”

Recreation Commissioners, however, had a tough time drinking the Kool-Aid. Not because they disagreed with Tenney regarding the project’s importance, but because they weren’t sure the project was actually eligible for Measure R dollars.

Commissioner Tony Colasardo was unable to be present at Tuesday’s meeting, but left written comments to be read on his behalf. In these comments he stated that the Gateway Monument does not meet Measure R criteria and would be better suited as a Measure U project.

The problem for Tenney is that the Measure U Committee is still working on the distribution process for those funds and she wants to build the monument this summer while momentum is strong.

Tenney argued that because the monument would benefit the entire community and would act as a portal to “everything we have to offer,” it was in fact a great Measure R project.

“It’s the ultimate trailhead,” she said, adding that the once the Monument was installed the Mammoth Community Water District would be donating a pocket park.

“You would be getting a free pocket park,” she exclaimed, implying that this would help qualify the Monument for Measure R, which is suppose to be distribute to projects falling under parks, trails and recreation.

Commissioner Teri Stehlik, however, questioned how usable the pocket park would be.

“Who really wants to sit at a park right along 395?” she questioned.

Commissioner Pat Agnitch asked Tenney whether or not the $250,000 would be enough to cover all of her costs. Tenney believed it would.

“Are you having fundraising issues,” Agnitch questioned further.

“I am not going to approach businesses [for money] until it snows,” Tenney replied.

Commission Chair Bill Sauser opined that the project really seemed more like something that should be funded by the Public Arts Commission. Tenney went before that Commission early in 2011 but was denied her funding request. She told Sauser that she had already scheduled to go before that body again on Jan. 26.

Mammoth Lakes Town Staff was asked to make an eleventh hour adjustment to the Fall Measure R application for a special event feasibility study at a special meeting of the Mammoth Lakes Recreation Commission on Tuesday.

The purpose of the meeting was to give all Measure R applicants the opportunity to answer questions from the Commission regarding their applications for the $355,332 available in Measure R funding.

Senior Planner Ellen Clark presented the Commission with a brief overview of the feasibility study application, which began with an ask of $60,000 that dropped to $25,000 after the Commission requested a reduction. The $25,000 would go toward a more limited technical study of biological and cultural constraints at several potential venue sites, she explained, which would precede a full-blown feasibility study at one or two of those sites at a later date.

“This is a placeholder request,” Clark said of the current application. She elaborated that town staff would be coordinating with the Economic Stimulus Council and Mammoth Lakes Events Coalition to narrow the number of sites to be studied, and would come back to the Recreation Commission with a particular scope of work for authorization in early Spring.

Commissioner Teri Stehlik expressed reservations about the application. “To me, this isn’t completing what the initial intent was,” she said. “Why are we doing this piecemeal? Let’s [just] do a feasibility study.”

Commissioner Knud Svendsen agreed: “request more money, but do it right the first time.”

But Chair Bill Sauser dissented, saying “this [study] could easily throw some sites out of the mix” to narrow down the possibilities for a more extensive—and expensive—feasibility study. “This is a small amount of money to do the grunt work,” he said.

Clark noted that it was due to the Commission’s previous request that she brought the amount down from $60,000, which necessitated a more limited study. However, she agreed that should the Commission now desire a more extensive study, the $25,000 could rise again to around $45,000.

Commissioners asked if Clark might bring that down to $35,000, pointing out that the Nordic biathlon had just conducted a feasibility study for that amount. Clark replied that the biathlon was an already-established event, while the feasibility study for special event sites would have to take into account multiple events, both established and speculative. “Nordic had a program,” Clark said. “This study will have 3 or 4 moving parts.”

Clark also made an effort to debunk the myth of previous feasibility studies sitting on a shelf somewhere in the town offices. An argument at previous Recreation Commission meetings, as well as Economic Stimulus Council meetings, has been that the data from these previous studies could be used to help narrow the scope and therefore cut the cost of a new feasibility study. “Everyone likes to think there’s all these things out there, but when you try to find them, they’re elusive,” Clark said. If they do exist, she added, “some don’t have much of a shelf life if they were done 15 years ago.”

Commissioner Sean Turner offered Clark an apology on behalf of the Recreation Commission: “I don’t think we’ve been clear in what we want [from the application] because I’m not sure that we know,” he said.

However, Commissioner Stehlik added, “If you asked me today would I approve this application, I’d say, unfortunately, absolutely not. It’s not going to provide us with what we need.”

Commissioners concurred that Clark should bring back the application with a broader scope. “I’m not concerned with the dollar amount,” Chair Sauser said. “It’s the quality that matters.”

The Recreation Commission will meet again on Jan. 10. The Commission will make its award recommendations on Jan. 19.

A “Multi-Year Commitment of Measure R Funds to Enhance and Improve the Town of Mammoth Lakes’ Component of the Mammoth Lakes Trail System (MLTS)” piqued the interest of the Recreation Commission at Tuesday’s meeting in Suite Z, not because the application was asking for too much funding, but because it was asking for no funding at all.

While other town applications applying to the Fall Measure R cycle are requesting a range of funds from $6,197.28 for Recreation Programming Enhancements to $200,000 for Trails End Park Phase 3 Completion, Town Manager Dave Wilbrecht explained that the MLTS application would be requesting $0 from the fall cycle. “The idea is in springtime we would come back with an allocation request,” he said. The request could be for as much as $300,000 annually for up to 5 years.

“Really [the application] is a long-term commitment the Town is making to the Trail System and Master Plan,” Wilbrecht said. In a sense, he elaborated, the application is a gesture the town wishes to make to the Forest Service as part of an effort to secure a long-gestating Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) between the town and FS. The MOU, drafted this winter, would establish a non-binding partnership between Mammoth and the Forest Service for the maintenance of trails within and around town.

As the MLTS application itself stated, “Should Town Council appropriate the funds requested through this Measure R application to enhance and improve the Town’s component of a Mammoth Lakes Trail System, the Town will then work with the INF [Inyo National Forest] to prepare the necessary legal documents to bind the Town and the INF in a cooperative partnership wherein each agency will coordinate the planning, construction, operations, maintenance, programming and administration of their respective components of a Mammoth Lakes Trail System.”

However, Mobility Commission Chair Sandy Hogan pointed out that there was a discrepancy between Wilbrecht’s emphasis on the MOU and the actual “necessary legal documents” that would bind Town and INF together. “The MOU is just a formal handshake,” she said. “To start a project, the Forest Service has to have a collection agreement. An MOU isn’t necessary. My suggestion is have the necessary agreements signed.”

Wilbrecht agreed, and noted that he would be meeting with the Forest Service on Wednesday. “We want to meet with the Forest Service to find out if there are other agreements necessary,” he said. (Following that meeting, he told The Sheet that indeed some other binding documents such as a collection agreement would be necessary.)

Another criticism from Hogan: a 5-year budget for the MLTS application “is not realistic in this case. The Town doesn’t even have a two-year budget,” she said. “We’re in a state of flux.”

Donnette Huselton also voiced concern that the Recreation Commission might be committing the entirety of Measure R funds, which for fall comes to $355,332, to a future MLTS allocation of $300,000. Wilbrecht clarified that the $300,000 would be an annual allocation from spring and fall combined.

Recreation Commission Chair Bill Sauser was all for the application. “It’s a prioritization issue,” he said. “Are we as a community interested in the MOU?”

The proposed project has previously received Measure R funds: $421,520 for Spring and Fall 2009, and $510,540 for Spring and Fall 2010. The application will be presented to the Recreation Commission along with all other Measure R applications at a Special Meeting Dec. 13. On Jan. 19 the Recreation Commission will make its award recommendations.