RECOMMENDATION DEVELOPMENT PROCESS Sample Clauses

RECOMMENDATION DEVELOPMENT PROCESS. The Working Group will work together to provide recommendations to Boulder County on how to distribute the Fund. The Working Group is not a final decision-making body; ultimately, the final decision on the distribution of funding lies with the Boulder County Commissioners. The commissioners are eager to hear feedback and receive guidance from the community and will carefully review the recommendations provided by the Working Group. The Working Group will seek to achieve "consensus" in the development of recommendations. For this process, the term consensus is defined as "all members of the panel can live with the proposal." Consensus requires that all members act in good faith and actively propose viable alternative solutions to meet the interests of other partners and find common ground. If the Working Group cannot achieve consensus on a given recommendation, any differing perspectives will be shared in a final report to the Boulder County Commissioners. The Boulder County Commissioners will review all perspectives provided in a final report and make decisions accordingly. The Working Group will consist of representatives from the following communities*: • Chute Rd./Juniper Heights • Coal Creek Canyon Dr./SH 72 & South of SH 72 (e.g., Crescent Lake Rd., Copperdale Ln., Hummingbird Ln., etc.) • Gross Dam Rd • Lakeshore/North Shore • Lazy Z/▇▇▇▇▇▇ Rd. (west side) • Miramonte • Pika/Flagstaff • SH 72 & GDR intersection • Tunnel Rd. 19/Lichen Ln. • Other – (TBD) *Boulder County reserves the right to appoint more than one representative from the larger communities and to combine other areas as necessary. Working Group members are requested to consider the construction impacts to the community as a whole rather than focusing specifically on their own individual circumstances. Members are asked to be cognizant that the goal of the group is to provide guidance to the Boulder County Commissioners on what the community feels is most fair. The Working Group will meet three times to develop recommendations. There will also be a community meeting open to the public in April. It is mandatory for Working Group members to attend all Working Group meetings; it is optional but strongly encouraged that Working Group members attend the community meeting. The schedule for the Working Group meetings is as follows: • Thursday, April 6, from 5:30 pm to 8:30 pm (mandatory in-person Working Group meeting – CCCIA or City of Boulder location TBD) • Tuesday, April 25, from 5:30 pm to...

RECOMMENDATION DEVELOPMENT PROCESS. The Recommendation Development Process explains the steps involved in assembling a recommendation for the Secretaries as to how the revenue in the Special Accounts would be spent with approval. This process includes the organizational entities described in Section III and provides several opportunities for any Federal, State or local governmental entities or other interested parties to participate. Figure 1 depicts the SNPLMA process and typical annual time- line. Each step in the process is then described in more detail. The actual time line will vary because Secretarial approval is required on the previous round of nominations before beginning a new round. The Lake Tahoe Recommendation Process is separate but parallel to the SNPLMA process and is depicted in Figure 1-A below. A. Nomination Period I. The TWG will consider projects that have been vetted through the federal interagency EIP management unit, which consists of representatives from federal agencies that implement EIP projects and the TRPA. This federal interagency management unit is responsible for providing the TWG with a prioritized schedule of projects to facilitate a rational and informed nomination process. The minimum standards for nominated projects for Lake Tahoe considered by the TWG are that the projects (1) are responsibilities of the federal government in the EIP (which may be part of a larger project that involves non-federal agencies), and (2) have a willing and ready federal sponsor that confirms that a project has been programmed through a federal interagency EIP Management unit that follows the objective and basic implementing measures. The USDA Forest Service submits its agency’s projects to the federal interagency EIP management unit from the Priority List required under the Lake Tahoe Restoration Act.