[Editor's Note: This is the first article in a series of articles on the Grant County Commission work session on Feb. 9, 2021 and culminating in the Grant County regular meeting on Feb. 11, 2021.]
By Mary Alice Murphy
Members of the committee that helped Grant County Procurement Officer Randy Hernandez review the proposals for an Outdoor Recreation Plan for the county attended the Grant County Commission work session on Feb. 9, 2021. After commissioners' approval of rearranging the order of items on the agenda and after some confusion, District 1 Commissioner and Chairman Chris Ponce moved the discussion of the request for proposal from the review of the regular meeting agenda up to before public input at the work session agenda so that the people could get back to their jobs.
County Manager Charlene Webb said: "On the agenda for the regular meeting, you have an RFP for consideration addressing the Trails and Outdoor Recreation Planning Services. You have in your packet a recommendation from Randy Hernandez to award the services to the SE Group. Part of the process included an evaluation committee and subject matter experts who provided what I considered to be a great amount of expertise and advice, which I found to be very helpful. The committee and the subject matter experts met on Dec. 11 and scored all the proposals. We decided we wanted to hear presentations from and interview each one of the applicants. So, we met again all virtually on Jan. 8 and re-evaluated and rescored the proposals. Today we have members of the evaluation committee to tell you why they made their recommendations for awarding the contract. Priscilla Lucero (Southwest New Mexico Council of Governments executive director), Christa Osborn (Gila National Forest), Michael "Mischa" Larisch (Grant County Planning and Community Development Director) and I were on the committee. Bridgette Johns (SWNM Act project coordinator) and Martyn Pearson (co-owner of Gila Hike and Bike) served as subject matter experts."
Lucero spoke first. "Thank you for letting me sit in on this committee. It's always a learning experience. This group brought a variety of diversity to the process. I think it's important to look at diversity. And I always look at how the consultants deal with funding. Do they understand the funding mechanisms and how it all works? We all agreed that the group we have chosen had that commonality. When you hear oral arguments, it is most helpful to hear their perspective. I feel extremely comfortable and confident with the choice of SE Group, which I feel fully represents the diversity of this county."
District 2 Commissioner Javier "Harvey" Salas asked why the SE group was chosen, when they ranked third.
Webb said the scoring has to give points to New Mexico companies, no matter what. "This group lost points for not being in New Mexico. We don't have to go with the highest score. It's the committee's evaluation that makes the recommendation."
Hernandez explained that Bohannon Huston, one of the applicants also got points for having worked with the county and being from New Mexico.
Salas asked why Sites Southwest was the top-scored one, and Hernandez said he hadn't brought the scorings, so "right off the top of my head, I don't know why."
Webb said they scored points for having done work for a state agency, so they scored a few more points for that. "They had done some work in Grant County, so were familiar with us, but they had not done work for the county."
Pearson was next to speak. "This was a fascinating process, and I enjoyed being part of it. I don't come from a background of reviewing proposals, but I do spend all my recreational time, biking, hiking, backpacking in this area and in the southwest. When it came to reading the proposals, two stood out for me. The SE Group and the Sites Southwest were the best. I was a bit concerned at seeing the SE Group in fourth or fifth because they lost those points. I thought the proposal had what we would benefit from, specifically with regard to data capture. They were the only group that could collect data from the maps that are created for where people are riding and recreating. They also touched on OHV (off-highway vehicles) use, which seemed to stand out. A big one was their examples looked like this area. Bohannon Huston didn't seem to have proficiency in carrying out the plans, like another one I can't remember the name of. Their examples were like paved and didn't take into account all of the single tracks that people can't maintain. Even the Forest Service struggles to maintain them. We have a lot of dirt tracks, some way out in the forest; some aren't mapped; some of them have tons of trees down on them. SE Group had a familiarity that seemed to match this area. The proposal that gave on the Zoom call totally blew me away. They are focusing a lot of their energy right now into turning older mine towns into outdoor rec towns and seemed to be very conscious of the challenges a mining town can have and how to take an outdoor rec community and organize so that both can succeed. When it came to listening to the presentations, the Sites Southwest was good, but didn't seem as passionate about what they were doing. The one thing I'll mention about the review group if that everyone was very professional and respectful. It felt special to be a part of the group. And it felt like the decision was unanimous, which I didn't expect. The way they were going to look for funding seemed to match the group. The way I wanted to see their examples seemed to match the group. It felt like for everyone in the group, SE struck a chord for what we wanted to do."
District 4 Commissioner Harry Browne said: "one of our concerns in moving to outdoor recreation is that we don't want to be overrun with too many people like some towns have been. Did you get a sense from any of these groups that we want to diversify with outdoor recreation, but we want to maintain quality of life and will they be concerned about all the residents?"
Pearson said the SE Group is working on a statewide plan for OHV in Minnesota. "I didn't get the feeling that they wouldn't be concerned about the overarching use. The other thing is that we have the advantage of being a bit behind in this effort. You always hear about Moab and look at what they did. But they made some errors in oversight. We have one trailhead with a bathroom. We are looking at complete trail systems, where a user can arrive and have everything they need. A great example is in Phoenix, where you literally have showers in the bathrooms. I've stood there and watched while business professionals – you don't know they are a business professional because they're in their gear. They go for a ride, come back, shower, put on their business suit and go to work. I think we have the opportunity to make sure we have everything a person needs, including mapping and parking. Honestly, if I'm being fair to this area, I don't think we have any trail system that is complete, with every need met. Of all the groups, I felt the SE Group was more aligned with that. It made me want to go and see where they have worked and are working."
District 3 Commissioner Alicia Edwards said: "Having our community not being overrun by a bazillion people is part of why I think this trails and outdoor recreation plan is so important. How much is the SE Group concerned about community input so we can construct a future that we all want to be part of?"
Pearson said: "Every one of the applicants talked about public input and touched on it. I was happiest with their group and their answers. I remember their answers being thorough. I can speak to that, because I can't estimate how much of my day is spent fielding questions about trails and the area, people's ideas, hopes for the future. I feel like I get quite heavily inundated with complaints and concerns. I came with the idea that public input is very important. I was accosted by a former town councilor who is so passionate about this and wants to be part of the process. We have so many different users and different outcomes that could have so many different impacts. I feel confident that this group will listen to public input really well. I feel other vested interest groups will get the same opportunity to be listened to."
Johns was next to speak. "I'm very grateful to have been part of this review. I was surprised that the decision was unanimous, but after hearing the presentations, I was so excited about the SE Group. Their answers were on point and instantaneous. The key phrase I remember was 'If you're out, you're in.' Their main focus was to listen to public input and proceed from the ground up."
Edwards thanked the group for all their work on the review.
Johns said she was struck by the SE Group's out-of-the-box approach. "They work all over the country. I feel they could take our Five Points Initiative and move us forward."
Salas said, during all this COVID-19 time, "I've been surprised at how many locals use the trails, plus I also see license plates from everywhere."
Lucero said: "I'm all about public input and all about community. I looked at everything from that perspective. I asked myself: 'Do they really understand public input, coming from a rural community where some people have a tendency to not speak up?' So, we had that conversation about bilingual groups and having focus groups, and how do we become creative in seeking that public input. That was a big emphasis for me. But another big emphasis for me was hearing their responses and their knowledge about the Great American Outdoors Act and how this plan would it be integrated in our state plan that will potentially fund these projects. We're learning there is a 50 percent match required on these water and land recreation grants and it might be a stretch for some communities to apply for. I wanted to make sure all these pieces were implemented, so we don't have duplication of efforts. I wanted to make sure all these commonalities are secured, so we could go out for funding."
Larisch said he, too, was surprised at the unanimous decision. "I was shocked that we had the quality of presentations from all the groups. I will say that the SE Group, they did rise to the top for me, too, unexpectedly. I knew we had a couple of groups that put in a notice of intent that I thought would rise to the top and they didn't. Yes, the group was unanimous. There was no waffling whatsoever. All of them talked about utilizing GIS. These guys went into the storybook of using it. Some others did, too, but SE Group pulled in their GIS group, which I think is out of Farmington. All of those that were out-of-state wanted to pull in New Mexico groups, but this one was the GIS expert from the Bureau of Land Management out of Las Cruces, so he knows our area very well. Because we put public input as a high priority—we knew that's what everyone wants—all of them hit on it. This group, because of the dynamic of their having been all over the country and their understanding of communities similar to ours, just seemed to get it. All of the applicants seemed to understand remote meetings during COVID, but this group had been doing it before the pandemic, because of working all over the country. I want to thank Martyn and Bridgette for being part of the group. They really gave their input."
Browne said: "Martyn said that the SE Group was the only one to mention the OHV use. I'm not a big fan, but I know they are part of the community, and we need to accommodate them, and we need to minimize conflicts. Do you feel that they will include all users, including the OHV community?"
"I do," Larisch said. "Everyone tried to pinpoint it, because they knew we wanted to include OHVs as one of the user groups, but they (SE Group and also Sites Southwest) had some of the best answers to the potential conflict. It came down to the capacity of being able to work with us and devote their time to us as a community. SE Group rose above to me on that."
With no public input at the work session, the next article will begin with county reports.