November 2007 Training Conference
Resolution # 1
Whereas, the current Commission policy states that applicants have a four-consecutive year period to make multiple applications for Planned Grazing Systems (DSP-3/33/333) that begins the day the Board approved the initial claim, a $90 per acre limit, and a $13,500 maximum cost-share limit, and
Whereas, the Commission has recognized that the Planned Grazing System practice is very effective in maintaining forage production and therefore better water quality in drought conditions, and
Whereas, smaller acreage graziers are not able to spread basic watering costs over as many acres thereby operating at an economical disadvantage, and
Whereas, some landowners were given an additional period of time to expand their systems, and
Whereas, Planned Grazing Systems are most effective and efficient when fine-tuned and/or expanded with time and experience;
Therefore, be it resolved: That the Missouri Association of Soil and Water Conservation Districts urge the Soil and Water Districts Commission to extend the four-year limitation on DSP-3/33/333 applications to 9 years and remove the $90 per acre cost-share limitation while keeping the maximum state cost-share allowed at $13,500 per landowner.
Resolution # 2
Greene County SWCD
Whereas, according to the Parks and Soils Sales Tax Law, the Soil and Water Commission has been delegated the responsibility for developing soil and water program policy, and
Whereas, the Soil and Water Commission has a past history of gathering information from local soil and water district boards to develop a sound and reasonable conservation program policy, and
Whereas, the Commission and district boards have been excluded from recent decisions affecting local district operations (e.g. maps of practices mandated by DNR program office) and have been offered no opportunity for input, and
Whereas, cost share practice claims are required to be certified by the responsible technical agency (NRCS),
Therefore be it resolved: that practice certification should be accepted for cost share payment without additional (map) evidence and that program policy should not be altered without justification before working through the proper Commission channels.
Greene County SWCD
Whereas, the local Soil and Water Conservation District board is the elected governing body of a soil and water conservation district, and
Whereas, a function of a soil and water conservation district board is to hire qualified employees and make budget decisions each fiscal year based upon employee job performance, pay increases and advancements, and
Whereas, district boards have received direction from a state agency on the compensation and promotion for work for non-state district employees
Therefore be it resolved: that soil and water conservation district boards should not relinquish local control to state or federal conservation agencies and should continue to provide supervision to SWCD employees. Let it be further resolved that district funding should not be tied to unattainable goals determined by state agency staff.
Supported by: Audrain, Barton, Benton, Bollinger, Cape Girardeau, Christian, Clay, Cole, Crawford, Dallas, Daviess, Grundy, Lawrence, Macon, Mercer, Miller, Morgan, Pettis, Ripley, Saline, St. Francois, Shelby, Warren & Webster SWCDs.
Greene County SWCD
Whereas, the local soil and water conservation district board is the elected governing body of a soil and water conservation district, and
Whereas, a function of the soil and water conservation district board is to identify local conservation issues and to offer appropriate environmental corrective measures and
Whereas, the board feels that we are losing our close working relationship(s) with sister agencies and conservation partners such as the Natural Resources Conservation Service, the Missouri Department of Conservation, the Farm Service Agency, the University of Missouri Extension Service, and Watershed Committee of the Ozarks,
Therefore, be it resolved: that soil and water conservation district boards work together with the DNR program staff and the Soil and Water Commission and sister agencies or conservation partners to review proposals before acting on any major changes that would hinder our combined conservation efforts.
Supported by: Barton, Benton, Bollinger, Cape Girardeau, Christian, Clay, Cole, Crawford, Dallas, Daviess, Grundy, Lawrence, Macon, Mercer, Miller, Morgan, Pettis, Ripley, Saline, St. Francois, Shelby, Warren & Webster SWCDs.
Gasconade County SWCD
Whereas, the Soil and Water Districts Commission Plan for the Future states that they will conserve Missouriís soil and water resources and support clean water by working with others to determine and implement long-term strategies to conserve Missouriís productive power of the agricultural land in a way that is protective of Missouriís water resources and
Whereas, the number one non-point source pollutant, by a wide margin, entering Missouriís waters is sediment
Whereas, it is the local Conservation Districts and Commissionís responsibility to assure taxpayers that, by continuing soil and water conservation programs, the purity of the water in their streams and rivers will be protected
Therefore, be it resolved: that the Missouri Association of Conservation Districts and the Soil and Water Districts Commission stress their strong opposition to the deliberate dumping of thousands of tons of soil by the Corps of Engineers into the Missouri River.
Supported by: Moniteau SWCD
Christian County SWCD
Whereas, the requirements for documentation of structural practices constructed with funds from the Missouri State Parks and Soils Tax is more stringent on certain practices (e.g. those involved with grazing management), than other structural practices applied throughout the state (e.g. terrace systems, water ways), and
Whereas, the structural practices installed with Missouri State Parks and Soils Tax funds have multiple levels of review and technical certification by the Natural Resources Conservation Service as mandated by program policy, and
Whereas, any Technical staff of the Soil and Water Conservation District or Natural Resources Conservation Services has received adequate training and job approval for designing and inspecting structural practices, and
Whereas, the information interpreted from a map may not adequately represent the design of a structural practice due to topography, geography or the geology of that particular site, and
Therefore be it resolved: to maintain equality in the review of structural practices, that the articles identified in memorandum 2007-035 be repealed by the commission and that technical certification of a practice remains a responsibility of adequately trained and certified field office staff.
Supported by: Audrain, Barton, Benton, Cape Girardeau, Christian, Clay, Cole, Crawford, Dallas, Daviess, Grundy, Lawrence, Macon, Mercer, Miller, Pettis, Ripley, Saline, St. Francois, Shelby, Warren & Webster SWCDs.
Livingston County SWCD
Whereas, the Livingston County SWCD believes all terrace practices should require topsoiling, regardless of soil type;
Whereas, the Livingston County SWCD believes the decision to approve cost-share assistance for topsoiling on all terrace practices, regardless of soil type, should be up to each individual Soil and Water Conservation District;
Therefore, be it resolved: that the MASWCD urge NRCS and the Commission to approve cost-share assistance for topsoiling the practice for all terraces.
Department of Natural Resources, Soil and Water Conservation Program Comments: State Cost-Share practices are designed in accordance with NRCS specifications set forth in the Field Office Technical Guide. When it is determined that topsoiling will be effective, based on the soil type and amount of topsoil remaining, the landowner is required to topsoil for the practice to be certified s meeting standard. The commission has approved the use of state cost-share funds for topsoiling in those instances where it is required nd so noted on the drawings.
Livingston County SWCD
Whereas, the Livingston County SWCD believes that the fencing and water component expenses should not be included in the $15,000.00 and above NRCS requirement that require the designs to be approved by the NRCS Area Office for structure practices.
Whereas, the fencing and water components do not affect the structural design of the structure;
Therefore, be it resolved: that the MASWCD urge NRCS to exclude the cost of fencing and water component expenses from the $15,000.00 and above NRCS requirement.
Warren County SWCD
Whereas, the state office has consistently encouraged soil and water districts take the initiative to supplement Soils & Parks Tax district assistance grants with matching grants, 319 grants, AgNPS SALTs, local funds, or other types of funding for salaries info/ed programs, and equipment purchases.
Whereas, the DNR Memo #2008-007, "Health Insurance", states "only those employees that are paid from the Parks and Soils Sales Tax will be eligible to have their health insurance and retirement paid with the Parks and Soils Sales Tax funds."
Whereas, district boards voted on health insurance before learning of the requirements stated above for their employees to be eligible for benefits.
Whereas, the state office is deciding who is/is not a district employee by which type of funding is being utilized to pay their salary.
Therefore, be it resolved: that the Commission should decide who is/is not a district employee and they should receive their benefits as was believe to be the case when the search for better health insurance began.
Warren County SWCD
Whereas, the state office has consistently encouraged soil and water districts take the initiative to use matching grants, 319 grants, AgNPS SALTs, local funds, or other types of funding for salaries when their allotments were inadequate to fund salaries, info/ed programs, and equipment purchases.
Whereas, the new FY08 allotments, as outlined in the 6/29/07 DNR letter to each district, the districts are only receiving what the state funded in salaries for FY07 or the minimum for that employeeís pay-range plus 8%. This includes NO compensation for years of experience. The new allotment has also limited the salary paid for an employee because they are only funding the stateís portion of the matching grants used for their salary.
Whereas, to many districts, this is a pay reduction, which the state office consistently denied would take place.
Therefore, be it resolved: that district employees, as deemed by the districts/commission, should be funded for salaries and benefits in full, not only the stateís portion for matching grants last year, as districts were led to believe. The districts should not be given partial funding because of the long-time problem of under-funding districts in the first place. In the past, is was the commissionís policy that anyone working for soil and water districts and worked 1000 hours qualified for benefits.
Montgomery County SWCD
Whereas, the state office has consistently encouraged soil and water districts take the initiative to use matching grants, 319 grants, AgNPS SALTs, local funds, or other types of funding for information/education when their allotments were inadequate to fully fund these programs.
Whereas, matching grants for info/ed has been taken away and the state has placed the burden on each district to fund their established info/ed programs from local funds.
Therefore, be it resolved: that districts receive grant monies for established and proven info/ed programs. The districts should also be encouraged, not discouraged, to conduct various "hands-on" info/ed programs to schools within their counties which has been highly supported by tax-payers.
Warren County SWCD
Re: Health Insurance for Board Members
Whereas, Soil and Water Conservation District Board Supervisors are volunteers by statute, and
Whereas, District Board Supervisors are not eligible to receive health insurance through the current system. This is due to the fact that board members are a volunteer position, and
Whereas, DNR has group health insurance established for soil and water district employees;
Therefore, be it resolved: The Warren County Soil and Water Conservation District would like to urge MASWCD in cooperation with DNR to change MO Statute Chapter 278, Soil Conservation, Section 278.110.4, to read: A soil and water supervisor shall receive no compensation for his services, but he shall be entitled to expenses, including travel expense and health insurance for self and family through the MCHCP if it is paid 100% by the supervisor.
Reason: it is getting increasingly difficult to find people willing to take on the role of supervisor. Due to the high cost of health insurance for self employed farmers, especially as they get older. This would be an incentive for self-employed farmers to run for the position. At the same time, there would be no premium cost to the state.
Buchanan County SWCD
Whereas, Currently land under an expiring Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) contract and land that has recently been removed from a mature CRP contract are not eligible for state cost share according to rule 10 CSR 70-5, 020(2) (erosion rate limitations). And that this same land is not eligible for state cost share until the fields are cropped for three to four years and an erosion problem does develop.
Therefore be it resolved: That MASWCD urge the Commission to allow land under an expiring Conservation Reserve Program contract, which will be brought into cropland production, be eligible for state cost share funding during the first year out of the CRP program. Justification will be based upon the calculated erosion rate of the land while it was cropped prior to being enrolled into CRP. Eligible land will have a pre-CRP erosion rate greater than T.
The rule, 10 CSR 70-5.020(2) have an additional instance when excessive erosion is not necessarily occurring.
(H) for the establishment of conservation practices on land recently removed from an expired CRP contract.
Failed the 2/3 required vote to bring from the floor for discussion.
Livingston, Grundy, Daviess and Harrison County SWCD's
Therefore be it resolved: that in order to serve as a Missouri Soil and Warer Districts Commissioner, one must have had local experience by previously or presently serving on the local soil and water conservation board.
By Law Amendment #1
Proposed Amendment to By-Laws
Amended MASWCD Constitution and By-Laws - Article VI, Section 2 and 2A; and Article VII, Section 2A
Article VI -- Board of Directors -
Officers - Organization Units
Section 2: Officers of the Association.
The Officers of the Board of Directors shall serve as the
Officers of the State Association. The President shall call the elected
Directors together at the Annual Meeting for the election of the Vice-Presidents
in odd number years
, and the election of President elect in even number
years. The President then completes the organization by appointing a
Treasurer, committee chairmen and the advisory members. At the odd
number year Board meeting, during the Annual Meeting, the
A. President-elect: At the end of the first year of the Presidentís
Article VII -- Eligibility - Term of Office -
Compensation - Duties
Section 2: Term of Office.
A. President: The term of the President shall be for
two (2) years,
and the person so elected shall not be elected to a
successive term in that office