Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Trails To Tomorrow Framework topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Advisory board distills 'Trails to Tomorrow' findings, agrees to draft general-plan language and tactics
Summary
A working group condensed the Trails to Tomorrow consultant report into a decision framework the board discussed Nov. 20; members emphasized public lands as the county’s economic driver, flagged workforce and housing constraints, and agreed to circulate materials and ask Chris Wilson to draft initial general-plan economic language.
Melissa Jeffers, who led the working group, presented a condensed version of the Trails to Tomorrow report Nov. 20 and proposed a decision framework — strengthen, diversify, develop and evolve — to convert consultant recommendations into county-tailored tactics. Jeffers told the board the goal was to make the consultant data actionable and to surface local nuances that consultants may have missed.
Jeffers summarized headline findings she reviewed with the report’s author, Jeremy Sage: "The direct tourism industry ... make up 87% of our taxable sales in our economy, make up 52% of our services taxable sales, and 49% of our residents are directly employed by what they call, quote, unquote, tourism." She said the board should treat the county’s role as "facilitating public land use and visitor management" because visitation to public lands drives the built and human infrastructure and the county’s high seasonal visitor counts.
Board members debated framing: some argued public lands should be presented as the county’s central economic asset even though the lands are federally owned; others recommended using precise language such as "partner with" or "develop dedicated partnerships with land managers" to reflect limits on local control. Members pressed for the presentation to acknowledge constraints (housing scarcity, workforce shortages, and resident sentiment) alongside the economic benefits so public audiences find the analysis credible.
Participants also identified missing metrics and data gaps — school performance, wages for service occupations, and mitigation costs such as trash and water — and suggested pursuing supplemental data (USU or a research assistant) to establish baselines. Jeffers said she and staff had already discussed additional data sources with the consultant.
On next steps, the board agreed to circulate Jeffers’s PowerPoint and a Word document that maps consultant tactics into the new framework so members can prioritize actions. Board member Chris Wilson offered to draft an initial revision of the general-plan "economic health" section and place a first draft on his calendar for Dec. 4; members agreed to send him suggested language and tactics before that date. The board also discussed plans to present refined language and prioritized tactics to the county commission and to include the city in outreach.
The board noted an upcoming site visit from the governor’s office of economic opportunity (GOYO) scheduled for Dec. 18, and staff said the visit will include short site visits to show how past grant dollars were used (housing, childcare, chamber efforts) and to discuss priorities for future rural grants.
