Cache County COSAC to draft outreach and small-parcel funding proposals after council workshop

Cache County Open Space Advisory Committee members on Aug. 4 agreed to prepare specific outreach proposals and refine a funding strategy for smaller parcels, following a recent joint workshop with the county council that committee members described as constructive.

At the start of the meeting, Brandon (COSAC member) said, “Folks okay? I’ll just say, without objection, we’ll adopt the minutes and agenda for today’s meeting.” Committee members then moved into follow-up on the joint council workshop, outreach planning and a discussion of conservation funding for smaller parcels.

Committee members said the council asked COSAC to return with concrete proposals the council could approve and support. Keegan (county council liaison to COSAC) described his role at the workshop and said the liaison presence helped clarify concerns: “I think there were some concerns initially that we that we're about reaching out to specific individuals with public money and then using public money to promote, ways to get more free public money, and I feel like those concerns were explained and alleviated.”

Members agreed to assemble a packet for the council that lays out recommended outreach steps, costs and selection criteria. The outreach items the committee listed at the meeting include: - A joint news release and statement, drafted by the committee chair in coordination with the executive office; - A direct-mail campaign targeted to property owners in priority gateway areas (committee members discussed preexisting maps and a parcel list for areas such as the Sardine gateway); - Social-media and radio outreach (committee members discussed using the executive office’s channels and scheduling interviews with local outlets such as KBXL and the Herald Journal); - Partner and municipal newsletters (for example, utility-bill inserts distributed by towns in Cache Valley).

Committee members discussed the mechanics and costs of direct mail. One participant suggested a per-address cost around 40 cents and an example budget line of roughly $400 for a small mailing. The committee said it will present the council with maps, a bulleted description of the selection criteria used to identify parcels, and an itemized cost estimate.

The committee also discussed a recent private mailing from a group called Friends of Open Space that had caused some confusion among council members. Members agreed the county should produce its own outreach materials to limit confusion and be “out in front” of external efforts.

On small-parcel funding, the committee agreed it has not fixed a single size cutoff but discussed using a working threshold of about 20 acres to flag parcels that tend to be more complicated or have higher per-acre costs. Members said smaller parcels could still be eligible under the right conditions and that scoring and council criteria would still apply. A committee member asked staff to compile existing data on dollars per acre and property values to inform a small-parcel strategy.

The group discussed several ongoing and recently funded projects and the county’s available funds. A staff summary presented at the meeting noted that “the first 6,000,000 has been spoken for between the various projects.” Committee members named projects discussed in prior meetings, including Elkhorn Ranch (federal funding confirmed and currently in due diligence), Paris Farms (ground loan approval), Harris Farms and Civil Farms. Committee members characterized those projects as “works in progress” because some remain without permanent easements or final management arrangements.

David (Executive) described two county acquisitions that required confidentiality during negotiations, citing competitive offers and lengthy due diligence. He said, “We would like to input those 2 situations were very unique and, there were some confidential negotiations.” Committee members discussed possible ways to involve COSAC in closed-session discussions where legally permissible, or to conduct COSAC executive sessions when confidentiality is required.

On letters of support, the committee agreed it can provide general letters endorsing conservation easements for property owners pursuing external funding, provided those letters do not create a financial commitment from the county. Brandon said the committee has drafted or can draft template language for letters and that staff can circulate it for review.

Other administrative items noted at the meeting: the executive office is actively working to fill a vacancy on the committee; staff have reorganized the COSAC web page to centralize agendas and minutes; and the committee will aim to present completed outreach materials and parcel-mapping details to the council as soon as possible. Members were reminded that the council liaison prefers to have documentation a week in advance of any council agenda request.

Why it matters: COSAC manages county open-space funds and makes recommendations about acquisitions and outreach. The committee’s plan to present concrete, costed outreach options and a clearer small-parcel strategy seeks to speed the council’s consideration of spending priorities and reduce confusion when non-county groups conduct separate outreach.

What’s next: Committee members assigned continuing work on the parcel maps and direct-mail lists to members who have previously worked on gateway mapping, and the chair said she would draft the joint statement with the executive office. The committee agreed to return to detailed discussion of the small-parcel funding strategy at its next meeting.