Utah Wildlife Forum banner
1 - 20 of 67 Posts

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,327 Posts
Interesting little twist from the UDWR: From dryflyelk's link above...

"This week the Utah DWR confirmed receipt of RMEF's application. The DWR also informed RMEF of a new request for proposal (RFP) process that will be implemented for the first time to select the conservation organization that will administer the expo permits in conjunction with their convention and expo event. RMEF is awaiting details and instructions from the department related to this process."
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,789 Posts
Interesting little twist from the UDWR: From dryflyelk's link above...

"This week the Utah DWR confirmed receipt of RMEF's application. The DWR also informed RMEF of a new request for proposal (RFP) process that will be implemented for the first time to select the conservation organization that will administer the expo permits in conjunction with their convention and expo event. RMEF is awaiting details and instructions from the department related to this process."
What does this mean exactly?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,993 Posts
I sincerely hope it doesn't mean they are changing the process after-the-fact in order to allow a revised bid from another group that would be competitive with this one.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,789 Posts
I sincerely hope it doesn't mean they are changing the process after-the-fact in order to allow a revised bid from another group that would be competitive with this one.
Would it surprise you? I think RMEF obviously has the best bid, they better not be side stepping for SFW now. Investigation time if they are, for the DWR and SFW.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,068 Posts
Interesting little twist from the UDWR: From dryflyelk's link above...

"This week the Utah DWR confirmed receipt of RMEF's application. The DWR also informed RMEF of a new request for proposal (RFP) process that will be implemented for the first time to select the conservation organization that will administer the expo permits in conjunction with their convention and expo event. RMEF is awaiting details and instructions from the department related to this process."
I wonder if this new process was developed before or after RMEF's application was received! There was a deadline was there not?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,789 Posts
I swear if they're beginning the process of sneaking them in the back door it can't just happen with no push back.

It's so obvious RMEF came in with a proposal that is undeniably the best offer. SFW couldn't have even come close if they tried. Turning there back on this great opportunity with RMEF would prove the corruption involved in the expo, the DWR, and our wildlife system.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
8 Posts
Discussion Starter · #8 ·
The proposal obviously makes the current deal sound very poor in comparison. For so many years we've heard SFW say, "well if this is so great a deal, who else is there who will take it on? Nobody?"

Well guess what? We got our wish. RMEF has stepped up and made a proposal that appears to blow the socks off of anything we've seen here before. I'm guessing that this took everybody who was satisfied with the status quo at SFW and the DWR off guard, so they are now scrambling to let SFW put a better foot forward with the new RFP process that magically appeared.

The cries of "nobody can do it cheaper or better!" are quickly being quieted.

Bravo, RMEF. Bravo.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
226 Posts
As someone who has gone through the RFP process with DWR, IMO, this works in RMEF's favor, as long as they put the effort and do a smart job presenting their benefits in their bid package. By going through the RFP process, this actually takes the decision-making process for the Expo contract out of the boards' hands and puts it into the hands of the contracts specialists, who in my experience, handle things pretty fairly and systematically.

I really have a hard time believing that SFW/MDF can offer the incentives that RMEF provides (concerts and other activities to go along with the expo), even if they match RMEF's offer of returning 100% of the dollars.
 

·
West side Utah Lake
Joined
·
3,905 Posts
Don't get all excited yet. I deal in RFP's all the time and I can assure you an RFP can be written in such a manner that it will exclude those you don't want to win. The RFP will tell you if this is a corrupt process or fair and open.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
2,327 Posts
I wonder if this new process was developed before or after RMEF's application was received! There was a deadline was there not?
Good question Lee. I don't know when the new process was developed, but would like to find out. Yes indeed, there was a deadline, and RMEF delivered their proposal just in time.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
325 Posts
R657-55 is the Administrative Rule that controls the award of the Expo Tag contract. R657-55-4 is the section that describes the process set out by which the DWR by conservation groups may apply for the the Expo Permit contract. See http://www.rules.utah.gov/publicat/code/r657/r657-055.htm#T4 Subsection 3 sets forth the application period of 8/1 to 9/1. Subsection 4 describes the information that must be included in an application for the permits. Subsection 6 set forth the factors the DWR will consider in making a recommendation to the Wildlife Board as to who should receive the contract. And subsection 7 sets forth the factors the Wildlife Board will consider in determining which group will receive the contract. This is the DWR's own rule that was just amended at the recent December RAC meetings and the January 2015 Wildlife Board Meeting. There is absolultely no mention of a formal RFP process. If the DWR wanted to use a formal RFP process then it should have included that process in its recent rule amendment.

If you have concerns about the DWR's recent decision to move to a new RFP process after RMEF submitted its application as explained in the RMEF press release, make your voices known to the DWR, the Wildlife Board and your politicians.

-Hawkeye-
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
609 Posts
If RMEF loses this, we (sportsman) need to let our voice be heard with the governor, our local representatives, commissioners, etc. We need to demand to know why the State of Utah would give up an enormous sum of money in order to support one conservation group over another, and not let that money go back into our wildlife resources. If RMEF loses out on this, there is undoubtedly back door deals being made and questions will need to be answered. It will be time for complete transparency, none of this "summary transparency" that was tried to be passed off to us previously.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,789 Posts
If RMEF loses this, we (sportsman) need to let our voice be heard with the governor, our local representatives, commissioners, etc. We need to demand to know why the State of Utah would give up an enormous sum of money in order to support one conservation group over another, and not let that money go back into our wildlife resources. If RMEF loses out on this, there is undoubtedly back door deals being made and questions will need to be answered. It will be time for complete transparency, none of this "summary transparency" that was tried to be passed off to us previously.
Start pressuring now by contacting them before it happens. Pressure the DWR, governor, and wildlife board not to use this backdoor bull crap to sneak SFW in after the fact.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,789 Posts
So what is this magical first time change? I've emailed but have yet to get a reply anyone else had any luck?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,789 Posts
Thought I would post what Randy Newberg posted on his site regarding the expo and changes made to the process, he sits on the RMEF board, seems the DWR is looking to change things for unknown reasons:


"""As most of you on this site know, I sit on the RMEF Board of Directors. A lot of you have emailed me with questions and given the confidentiality requirements that come with sitting on the Board, I have had to point you to the RMEF Headquarters. While I was out filming in Wyoming last week, RMEF issued a press release that confirmed that RMEF did submit a bid and some details of that bid.

There is now a lot of conjecture about why RMEF submitted a bid, what RMEF plans to do if awarded the bid, and a host of other things that seem intended to cast doubt over the motives of the RMEF bid for the Expo in Utah.

We have been working on this for the better part of a year. It was something we decided to do because we feel that the wildlife and the hunters of Utah could benefit by having all of these raffle tag proceeds directed to wildlife, whether RMEF hosted the Expo or some other organization made an even better proposal. If the final outcome is that wildlife and hunters benefit from the money that is being raised, that is a good outcome, no matter who is awarded the Expo.

RMEF engaged expert legal counsel to assist with preparing the bid. We examined every aspect of the Utah Statutes that relate to how the Expo operates, how the bid process works, criteria that must be met to be eligible, and all other aspects to make sure the RMEF bid was crafted as requested. The bid was hand delivered to the UT Division of Wildlife Resources the afternoon of the deadline that is identified in UT statute and a signed receipt was provided to the law firm.

Subsequent to RMEF submitting that bid, plenty has occurred behind the scenes, some of which DWR is requesting be kept confidential. The new idea of a Request for Proposals (RFP) comes as a complete surprise to RMEF and to the law firm hired to assist us with the bid. That RFP is not provided for in statute. There is no administrative rule that we are aware of that allows DWR to change the manner by which the process is awarded. Maybe such administrative rule exists and we are not aware of that.

Rumors have been floating around that RMEF will get the tags and move the Expo. Not sure who would start such a rumor, or why (well, I have a pretty good idea on both), but that is completely false. RMEF plans to host their annual convention in Salt Lake City for as long as the Expo contract would be awarded to RMEF.

Rumors have been started that RMEF will use the proceeds to purchase land outside of Utah. Again, another completely false rumor. Read the RMEF proposal and it states that 100% of the raffle proceeds will be given back to the state of Utah for habitat and access.

If there are other questions, please feel free to ask. Now that RMEF has issued their release, I am at liberty to answer questions that will clarify and concerns and hopefully dispel some of the rumors that seem to be growing by the day.

Most importantly, I hope the folks of Utah will ask their elected and appointed leaders to follow the statutes that exist. And whatever the final decision on who will be awarded the Expo contract, request that the leaders do what is best of Utah wildlife and Utah hunters. Putting more money on the ground is the reason why RMEF would go through the effort and cost to prepare and submit this bid. Hopefully that will be the outcome, no matter which organization is awarded the Expo."""

Thanks for all the interest in this topic.
 

·
West side Utah Lake
Joined
·
3,905 Posts
I doubt RMEF will win, remember folks your good and (dis)honest governor appointed the CEO of SFW to the wildlife board....ahhh the plot thickens. Also our current governor has a bad habit of picking who he wants to win contracts then paying off the losers with your tax dollars so they will quietly go away.
 
1 - 20 of 67 Posts
Top