Mt. Ashland requests city's permit

The Mt. Ashland Association — the nonprofit organization that operates the Mt. Ashland Ski Area — announced Thursday it wants the City of Ashland to turn over its special-use permit.

The city holds the permit to operate through the Forest Service. Concern over the city's liability if the ski area ceases to operate came to the forefront this year. If the city accepts the association's proposal, it would make the nonprofit — not the city — responsible for any restoration costs if the ski area goes bankrupt.

"By entrusting the permit to the Mt. Ashland Association the City of Ashland would in effect be relieving its citizens of any liability associated with restoration costs," Mt. Ashland Marketing Director Rick Saul said. "Those costs would become the sole responsibility of the Mt. Ashland Association."

In 1992, the Ashland community raised money to buy the ski area operations. Fourteen years later, with a proposed expansion still in limbo, the Mt. Ashland Association said it was time to ease concerns in the community and become the permit holder. Saul said the original intent was for the city to be a temporary permit holder.

Mt. Ashland Association President Bill Little said he hopes to start a fresh relationship with the city.

"We welcome a renewed and strengthened relationship with the city," Little said.

The Ashland City Council will likely hold a closed executive session Tuesday to discuss the Mt. Ashland Association's proposal.

Councilor Kate Jackson said the idea of passing the ski area special-use permit to the Mt. Ashland Association had been brought up in the past, and with the official announcement Wednesday, she said city staff and council need to discuss the issue internally.

"I'm definitely interested in resolving the issues with the city and Mt. Ashland," Jackson said. "The only way we're going to get there is if the entire council sits down to talk about it."

This year, the city council passed a resolution requesting the U.S. Forest Service deal directly with the city rather than the Mt. Ashland Association.

Councilman David Chapman, like other city councilors, said the city needs to discuss a proposal before considering handing over the permit.

"It's certainly an idea because currently we don't really have much control over what they do anyway," he said. "But if we give them the permit, we'll definitely want something in exchange."

The Mt. Ashland Association already sent an "asset purchase and sale agreement" to the city but did not specify any dollar amount to buy the permit or any material that would technically belong to the city. Some councilors are skeptical of the potential deal.

Councilor Cate Hartzell said a 2005 resolution passed by the city council — which states the city's position of oversight in ski area operations — is "a responsible strategy for protecting taxpayers and our water source."

In an e-mail to the Tidings Wednesday, Hartzell called the Mt. Ashland Association's proposal a step backwards.

"The SUP (special use permit) serves essentially as the city's insurance policy to ensure that the mountain is protected as the long-term source of our water," Hartzell wrote. "Given the high value our grandchildren will place on quality water, I'd say that's an insurance policy we can't afford to sell off."

A new city councilor — Eric Navickas — will take a council seat at the beginning of 2007. Navickas sued the Forest Service in 2004 over its environmental impact statement of a proposed 71-acre expansion to the ski area. He said giving up the special-use permit to the Mt. Ashland Association would be "foolish."

Navickas is trying to assure that his previous political involvement regarding the expansion does not create a conflict of interest in his making decisions regarding the ski area. Like Hartzell, he said the city needs to keep oversight over its watershed.

"It's in the interest of the city to have as much control over our watershed as possible," Navickas said.

Should the city agree to the Mt. Ashland Association's proposal, both would have to fill out a joint application with the Forest Service. Steve Johnson, recreation specialist with the Rogue River-Siskiyou National Forest, said the switch to a new permit would be relatively simple, although it would require some economic assessment to assure the Mt. Ashland Association had a proper contingency fund should the ski area cease to operate.

"Our sense is that it would be a fairly straightforward process," Johnson said.

Staff writer Alan Panebaker can be reached at 482-3456 x 227 or apanebaker@dailytidings.com.