The Outdoor Recreation Mitigation Board elected a chair by acclamation and moved forward on a draft grant application intended to reimburse counties for visitor‑related emergency and safety costs, members said at a meeting devoted to shaping program rules and application logistics.
Jared Henry moved to close nominations and appoint Andy as chair; Jorge Vasquez seconded, and no objections were voiced. The chairmanship is a rolling one‑year term under the board’s organizing statute, and Andy presided over the remainder of the session.
Board staff presented a multi‑part draft application designed to capture project metadata, eligibility criteria, and line items for visitor‑related emergency costs (search‑and‑rescue and EMS reimbursements) and visitor‑related safety costs (road repairs, solid‑waste operations, law enforcement). Seth from the state auditor’s office said his office “has our form out there already for what we’re currently collecting, and we have the authority to change that form,” and offered to prepopulate fields where state data exist.
The board emphasized statutory priorities. Members said the program will give precedence to reimbursement for search‑and‑rescue and emergency medical services before addressing broader safety or infrastructure requests. “We thought initially it’s like, okay, this is really a lot of reimbursement,” a staff presenter said. Sheriff Tracy Glover, who described differences between the existing Search and Rescue Reimbursement Board and the new program, said the earlier board “only reimburses, like, non‑core costs that counties incur,” and that the new fund could help cover county core costs that volunteers and agencies currently shoulder.
Members debated which metrics should determine need. The draft uses a rolling five‑year average of visitor‑related emergency incidents to inform prioritization; board members pressed staff to standardize whether that metric will rely on visitor counts, hotel occupancy and room‑tax (TRT) revenues, national‑park visitation, or dollar‑value estimates. Several members urged a single standard across counties so applications are comparable.
The statute, staff said, names counties as the eligible applicant. Board members clarified that privately run or hospital‑based EMS providers generally cannot apply directly; a county must be the applicant and may flow funds to special service districts or contracted providers. The panel also agreed the grant is primarily reimbursement based: counties would document actual incurred costs and seek reimbursement rather than receiving upfront project funds.
Participants discussed what documentation the board should require. Suggested materials included incident or case numbers, invoices and proof of payment for SAR/EMS calls, site plans and maps for road projects, budget narratives, and a W‑9 to enable payment. Several members opposed making external letters of support mandatory for straightforward SAR or EMS reimbursements; more complex capital projects might include an optional letter from local tourism advisory groups or a county‑level attestation of priorities.
Staff said the account currently holds about $6.8 million and that the board has discretion to set prioritization rules and thresholds. A tentative timeline presented to the panel proposed opening the application July 15, closing it Aug. 30, and targeting distributions by Oct. 1, though members noted those dates were provisional and depend on ongoing rulemaking and outreach.
Next steps include drafting administrative rules for a public comment period, refining the application to reduce county burden (including prepopulating state‑held fields), and scheduling a follow‑up meeting in March to review rule language and application edits. The meeting closed with no public comments.
Actions recorded at the meeting included the acclamation appointment of Andy as board chair; staff recorded a set of follow‑up items to refine eligibility, documentation standards, and prioritization metrics ahead of the proposed summer launch.