Fremont declares drought emergency
Published at
(Courtesy Rexburg Standard Journal)
ST. ANTHONY — Dale Swenson of Fremont Madison Irrigation came to discuss how much water Fremont County has at their disposal this year based on the major storage reservoirs in the Upper Snake River Basin and the current “snow water equivalent.”
“I’m here to request that a drought be declared for Fremont County,” Swenson said during Monday’s meeting of the Fremont County Commissioners.
He handed the commissioners a packet of documents that display reservoir storage and other data about the county’s water.Swenson said the storm patterns this year are similar to last year because storms from the north are “not as good” as storms from the east.
“We were in good shape, the first part of February,” Swenson said. “It’s been warm and dry. We did get up to average, but we’ve declined. It’s been downhill ever since (early February) on our snow water equivalent.”
The third document displayed the National Resources Conservation Service stream flow forecasts. This year, Henry’s Fork near Ashton is at 60 percent of its average. Swenson said last year at this same time, the stream flow forecast was at about 90 percent.
“We’re going to use a lot of storage water this year,” he said.
The commissioners voted unanimously to pass Resolution No. 2015-10 which states: “A resolution of Fremont County, Idaho, declaring that a local drought emergency exists in Fremont County, to be in effect until the end of the 2015 irrigation season until otherwise terminated by resolution of the Fremont County Board of Commissioners.”
Planning matters
Fremont County Planning and Building Administrator Tom Cluff reviewed the differences between the Teton View Regional Plan and the county’s comprehensive plan. The county is required, by law, to have a comprehensive plan. The purpose of having a comprehensive plan is to provide a specific set of rules that will guide future decisions the county makes about land use.
“When you adopt a comprehensive plan, that has weight,” Cluff said.“The regional plan is not like that. Because the regional plan is not adopted like the comprehensive plan it doesn’t have a role in the state’s statutory framework.” He further explained the goal of the regional plan was to allow members of different regions to have a discussion about potentially working together on future projects.
“The regional plan doesn’t have the same policy implications that the comprehensive plan does,” Cluff said. He said if they decided to, the comprehensive plan could be amended to include some of the regional plan content, but they don’t have to.
Cluff said one of the benefits of the regional plan is that if individual projects on the plan only end up applying to certain locations, no one needs to go through a regional planning group to get started. They only need to consult with who is directly related to the project, such as a city council or the county commissioners, for example.
“We’ve been very careful never to cross the line. We’re not creating an organization that creates a new level of coordination without direction from you (commissioners).”
Commissioner Bill Baxter asked what happens when the HUD grant ends.
“When the HUD grant ends, the federal government doesn’t come in and tell us to do anything?” Cluff said that no, that would not happen.
He added there was one part of the grant that “has any kind of leverage over future decisions,” which is the regional analysis of impediments (RAI) to free housing. It was study that was required by the grant.
“HUD and federal law requires that when you do an RAI the communities that participate in the RAI must work to correct the deficiencies that are identified there.”
He said the housing study that was completed identified some deficiencies, many of which already have plans in progress to develop solutions.
This article was written by Rexburg Standard Journal Reporter Heather Randall. It is used here with permission. The article was originally published here.