Gunnison 6-4-07 Meeting Minutes PDF

Home Browse Search

June 4, 2007 2. Project Proposal Ralph Grover mentioned two projects, the first from Grand Mesa Water Conservancy District, which is still being prepared. The second project was from Overland Ditch and Reservoir Company. Ralph stated that the Project Screening Committee was recommending that the Overland Ditch and Reservoir Company's Firm Yield and Permitting Analysis proposal be approved by the Roundtable for funding by the State. Ralph Grover then made a motion on behalf of the PSC that the proposal be approved for State funding. Dixie Luke seconded the motion, and the motion carried unanimousl y. Ralph stated that in the future the CWCB would be requesting electronic form of application to speed up the process. There was a discussion regarding the tardiness of three Gunnison Basin applications that missed the deadline. The three proposals will now be reviewed in September. Thomas Alvey stated that the problem was that the applicants were not on time, and that applicants should be made aware of deadlines (60 days prior to CWCB meeting). John McClow suggested that a letter be made ready to be signed when the applications were approved in order to expedite the process. Ralph Grover discussed that the three PSC members were each currently serving 6 month terms that would be up in August. The three members agreed to serve again. Ralph then asked if there were any projects that anyone knew of that needed to be reviewed. No projects were mentioned so the June 21 st PCM was cancelled. 3. Gunnison Basin Water Needs Assessment Tyler Martineau said that he and a number of the members on the Needs Assessment Committee have been working on a suggestion for how to address funding to complete the needs assessments. He circulated a memo to the Roundtable members. He mentioned that the Roundtable had a statutory responsibility to complete a needs assessment and the GBRT has been making progress utilizing the HB 1400 money for technical assistance. Eleven tasks had scheduled to be scoped, leaving 6 tasks to be funded with other monies. He brought up the concern that the Roundtable could end up using the money available to scope out the projects, but then not have funds available to carry out the needs assessment tasks. The memorandum suggested that the GBRT "temporarily earmark" 25% of each year's appropriation of Basin water supply funds for carrying out those tasks. After discussion of the pros and cons of earmarking different levels of funding, Hugh Sanburg made a motion to reserve 30% of the funds for the years 200612007, and 200712008 for needs assessments. Pete Kasper seconded. Discussion continued on the wording of the motion, and Hugh Sanburg changed the word "reserve" to "temporarily earmarked." Steve Glazer then made a motion to amend the amount to 45%. John McClow then seconded. The motion failed - II in favor, 14 opposed. Greg Clifton then amended the amount to 33%, which was seconded by Dave Baumgm1en. The motion passed 21 in favor, and I opposed. 4