Laserfiche WebLink
<br />6. John Bumgarner, Grand County Commissioner-elect, was unanimously selected as an at- <br />large member of the CBR T replacing Duane Scholl <br /> <br />7. New business. <br /> <br />a. Ken Ransford recommended that the CBRT request $100,000 per year for 2 years <br />to hire a person to educate Colorado citizens about CBRT issues. Voters on the <br />Front Range as well as local Roundtable residents should be targeted. <br /> <br />b. Tom Clark recommended that all CBRT counties and cities should adopt <br />regulations based on HB 1041. These give governments the power to review <br />building permits to determine if they meet water quality standards, are located in <br />areas posing geologic hazards, etc. <br /> <br />c. Louis Meyer recommended that the CBR T draft a letter and send a delegation to <br />Denver to meet with Mayor John Hickenlooper and members ofthe Denver Water <br />Board to discuss impacts that the Shoshone call agreement (in which up to 752 cfs <br />can be diverted upstream) will have on Colorado River municipalities. <br /> <br />1. Stan Cazier recommended that a representative fi'om XCEL energy come <br />to the November CBRT meeting to discuss Shoshone power plant <br />operations, and that the CBR T discuss drafting the letter and meeting with <br />Denver after that discussion. Ken Neubecker seconded the motion, and it <br />passed unanimously. <br /> <br />d. Chuck Ogilby questioned the status of the global settlement between Denver and <br />CBRT municipalities regarding Denver's water rights in the CBRT region. Tom <br />Long commented that 19 points were given to Denver and that the CBR T should <br />refrain from commenting until Denver replies to these points. <br /> <br />8. Roaring Fork Watershed Plan (RFWP): Presentation by Mark Fuller. The RFWP is a <br />process to create a common vision and open communication between local governments <br />and water managers regarding water management and development. <br /> <br />a. Five municipalities and 3 counties are in the Roaring Fork watershed. The RFWP <br />is a quasi-governmental body. 125 members have been meeting. <br /> <br />b. The goal is to inventory the Roaring Fork watershed, identify threats to the water <br />shed, and create an action plan that local governments can implement. <br /> <br />c. An example of an action item is to recommend a consistent river setback <br />requirement for all new development along the Roaring Fork River. <br /> <br />d. The RFWP will recommend further study about how groundwater pumping <br />affects water quality, and how converting agricultural water to municipal and <br />industrial uses affects water quantity and quality. The RFWP is investigating how <br />water treatment, storm water runoff, septic systems, and well permits affect water <br />quality. Eagle County did this, and it helped them prioritize projects for funding. <br /> <br />L\CWCB Imaging\Caleb\Minutes\Colorado\2006\Minutes Sep 2006 CBRT.doc <br /> <br />2 <br />