Laserfiche WebLink
<br />35 <br /> <br />be the master of the case, and these state1 don't want to <br />interfere with that. That didn't occur tolme at that time. <br />And when I said five states, I believe it ~hoUld be confined <br />to four states, none of these states whichlare involved in <br />the litigation. I <br />MR. MOEUR: May I suggest also tJat what the states <br />do may be controlled by the attorney generJls of the states. <br />. I <br />, <br />In my state we work with the attorney geneval pretty closely. <br />But after all, the attorney general is the jlegal representati' <br />of the state. And these people here, othe1 than Mr. Vernon, <br />should advise the legal entity in theirstite we have this <br />kind of gentleman's agreement, and they shiuld be requested <br />to conrorm to i~ $0 they won't get off the Ibase. <br />CHA~RMAN STONE: As far as cOlorJdo is concerned, <br />I . . <br />there is close liaison between the attorne~ general's office <br />and our of rice. The attorney general is a member of the <br />State Water Board, and I am sure that will be the situation <br />in Colorado. <br /> <br />MR. WILL: There is one last thijg I would like to <br />offer ror the record. I didn't make the s~atement today befor <br />I <br />I <br />the Commission--I probably should haVe--bUj I want to make it <br />before this Committee. Lthink it is owirt~ to Arizona, I thin <br />it is owing to Mr. Moeur and to his fellow ~ounsel for Arizona <br />and to Wayne Akin, that they have at all ti~s kept in close <br />touch with us and they have done their leve:l best so to frame <br />i <br />their complaint in the Supreme Court as notJ to question the <br />validity of the law or the river and as notl to involve us. An <br /> <br />I <br />-.J <br />