Budget Ad Hoc Group Meeting 

9-15-04 

Bureau of Reclamation Native American Affairs Office 

Phoenix, Arizona 

Attendees: Jeff Lovich, Mary Barger, Glen Knowles, Chris Kincaid, JD Kite, Bill 

Persons, Lew Coggins, Dave and Pam Garrett, Helen Fairley, Norm Henderson, Barb 

Ralston, Mike Liszewski, and Dennis Kubly 

Review of budget process 

There will be difficulty in having 06-07 budget and workplan completed by March 05 

due to extension of LTEP and general planning workload. Potential solutions: develop 

06-07 budget with core monitoring portion and OtherR&D components (not LTEP) 

thereof considered “locked in”, but with the long-term experimental plan and related 

research and development (OtherR&D) portions that are not related to the Core 

Monitoring Plan “subject to hard review.” The Humpback Chub Comprehensive Plan 

projects could be divided into these three groups and integrated into the budget 

accordingly. Budget categories could be Core Monitoring, LTEP, and OtherR&D. 

Action: Discuss this concept with TWG Sep 27-28.

Discussed need for a budget component that looks at the effects of management actions 

conducted outside the AMP, but often funded by AMP members, on AMP research and 

monitoring efforts. The integration of these efforts could be initiated at the beginning of 

the budget process by having them identified to the AMP at the time when BOR, 

GCMRC, and PA begin formulation of projects. Action: BAHG recommends to TWG that 

identification of projects external to the GCDAMP but that would potentially influence 

GCDAMP activities be initiated for the FY 06-07 budget and that TWG members will 

bring forth information on their agency projects for that purpose to the BAHG early in 

their budget and workplan development cycle. This is intended to result in a more 

comprehensive and collaborative process for maximizing information gain and exchange.

How should TWG address the AMWG priorities? Action: BAHG recommends to TWG 

that AMWG priorities are addressed by GCMRC assessing percentages of the budget that 

are being and have been allocated to the priorities identified at the AMWG’s August 

2004 workshop. GCMRC will do this analysis for the FY 05 budget and for previous 

budgets to the extent they have time available. This analysis will be presented to AMWG 

at their October 2005 meeting and feedback will be requested. Additionally, a 

comparison will be made of the sequenced RINs and the AMWG priorities (Bill P has 

agreed to conduct this analysis). Both of these tasks will be done (at least in draft) for the 

Sep 27-28 TWG meeting. 
Suggested Process and Schedule for FY 06-07 Development: 

GCMRC, BOR and PA review previous products and develop draft FY 06-07 budget and 

workplan—November 17-18, 2004 

BAHG receives draft budget and workplan by November 30; meet to revise —December 

7-8, 2004; mail to TWG by Dec 20 

TWG meeting w/review of draft budget and workplan—January ?? (TBD Sep 27-28; 

suggest week of Jan 10) 2005 

AMWG review w/fiscal and product development reporting for FY 04—February 2005 

BAHG review and revision—February 2005 

TWG meeting w/review, feedback and recommendation—March (TBD Sep 27-28, 2004; 

suggest early March) 2005 

AMWG meeting w/review and recommendation;—April 2005 

AMWG meeting w/update on product development—July 2005 

Action item: BAHG recommends that TWG appoint an ad hoc committee at their Sep 27-

28 meeting to identify and carry out the process for developing appropriations requests 

and recommending them to AMWG at their Oct 25-26 meeting. Both appropriation 

requests for the President’s budget (federal agency) and Congressional markup (nonfederal members) will need to be addressed. 

Action item: BAHG recommends that TWG appoint an ad hoc committee at their Sep 27-

28 meeting to develop the 5-year strategic outlook accepted by AMWG at their August 

2004 meeting and to identify formation of this group to AMWG at their Oct 25-26, 2004, 

meeting.