Board Meeting Minutes: July 11, 2011

AWA Board of Directors Meeting, July 11, 2011, SWCA office, Seattle.

Present:  Dennis Lewarch, Ross Smith, Bob Kopperl, Alex Gall, Mark DeLeon

Minutes Review from NWAC ’11 Business Mtg:  Big issue to be taken up was/is further deliberation on DAHP consultation list; Board election; Gary Wessen’s goodbye speech.

New Board, based on email following NWAC = Dennis Lewarch (pres), Faith Haney (vice pres), Bob Kopperl (sec), Ross Smith (treas), Mark DeLeon (DAL), Alex Gall (DAL), Mary Rossi (DAL).

Ross’s Treasurer’s Report

As of 7/30/11,    Checking = $1200.00

Savings = $6067.55

Total = $7267.55

Since the NWAC, we received $177 from new membership and renewal dues.

Dennis asked if we can get an email list, maybe from Nancy?  Ross said he will update the email list and send to Board.

Old Business


Faith asked for suggestions for the revised website.

-Check for defunct domains and old versions of site still floating.

-Update with new board list

-Post bylaws, old minutes

-Active blog

Alex – It would be a good idea to have a designated webmaster for regular updates to content and links.

Bob – We should solicit content for blog posts from membership, then figure out a way to announce new blog entries.

Mark – DAHP has a good model for that.

Journal:   Nothing to update from Chris and Guy

AWA Membership [sent by Ross via email 8/5/11]:

114 members have paid dues through 2011

7 have paid through 2012

1 has paid through 2014

New Business

DAHP Contractor List

Alex noted that a pdf still pops up on a link in their webpage [as of 9/22, their updated website doesn’t have a link to the list anymore].

Dennis noted that everyone at the NWAC meeting seemed to agree that a list needs to be made available – who should do it?

Alex felt it was appropriate for AWA to host the list; CRM is the bulk of the work being done.

Mark suggested following the framework set up by the Washington Trust for Historic Preservation.

Alex suggested we talk to an attorney about the legal ramifications of charging a small fee for being on the list, and terms & conditions agreement for listed entities to cover AWA that people read before accessing list – disclaimers

*Dennis agreed we should do it, motioned to contact attorney to discuss legal issues noted above – Bob seconded; all said yes.*

Further discussion – All agreed there is an upside to hosting list, esp. additional web traffic for AWA.  Alex and Bob suggested that once we get legal consul, come up with some simple options to present to AWA membership for final choice – list with disclaimer, list for fee with disclaimer, etc.

Public Outreach/Archaeology Month

DAHP has issued an archaeology month poster without any sort of outreach to go along with it.  Dennis noted that there is rarely anything useful put online as a single source for archaeology month information.

Faith wanted to know if we want to have an AWA-sponsored event.

Bob will inquire with Laura Phillips to see if the Burke wants to have an AWA-sponsored artifact ID day.

AWA Records Transfer

Dennis has a box of stuff, will track down remainder

Alex will get digital copies of old minutes to Bob; Bob will compile and give to Dennis

Standards for Specialized Analyses

Virginia Butler asked Bob if DAHP has standards for reporting faunal data, Bob said no, and she recommended starting a discussion.

Issue of report fulfilling its role in the regulatory context (pretty much what DAHP cares about in terms of report standards, along with their published survey report standards) versus adequate scholarship (what some of the rest of us care about).

Ross clarified Virginia’s concern – there is a lack of consistency between CRM reports, which makes doing any sort of synthetic research difficult.

Mark felt this would always be a problem; Dennis noted some reports wind up being peer-reviewed, most do not.

No immediate resolution on this one.

DAHP Excavation Permit Requirements

Alex noted that his firm is working on a SEPA-related project where they found 3 flakes, did more investigation around the discovery location, and recommended no additional work.  Under the RCW, DAHP still required an excavation permit for the construction to proceed, but didn’t disagree that no more investigation was needed.  His general concern was that this MO by DAHP will create additional friction amongst consultants and DAHP and may over time change how consultants record sites and make recommendations for non-106 projects.  Mark agreed that it unnecessarily draws out the process.

Next Board Meeting:  Saturday, October 8 – Alex’s Office in Vancouver.


Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s