Laserfiche WebLink
to our 3 projects — Res ervoir Celebration, Alamosa River Project , and Rio Grande Res <br />Phase II Technical Design — all submitted projects were approved with considerations — <br /> <br />Concerned about the first round — Rick Brown was as signed the task of taking a first cut <br />at all app lication s and trying to summarize — a fair attempt to get through the first round <br /> <br />Res Celebration was withdrawn — didn’t meet criteria — Alamosa River did get through — <br />Rio Grande still in process — at < ay meeting, a s Basin requests come in the RT’s will <br />have a better idea of what fits and what the real needs are — it’s a new pro gram, still a <br />bit awkward — thought that if Basin funds were approved, it’s ours to spend — if we come <br />up with projects we think fit, let’s forward them <br /> <br />Cindy — they had questions on budget — re miles, per mile payments, getting down to the <br />details <br /> <br />Ray - notice that one of the comments was whether it would be affordable to complete <br />the RG Res project — seems inappropriate to say “If you can’t afford, why should we <br />study it ” <br /> <br />Travis — that’s not one of the criteria — it’s meant to provide front end study --- had same <br />co ncerns with many other apps too <br /> <br />Ray — at IBCC there was a diversity of opin ion about the 11 79 money — some front <br />range people thought all $40 mill are to fill the gap of their water supply — what is <br />CWCB’s view of the purpose? <br /> <br />Travis — purpose is clear — with change of admin — the void in leadership and the <br />program having been on a fast track — encouraged apps for March meeting, staff was <br />challenged to meet d eadlines — staff is overloaded — to initiate and support smaller <br />projects that local entities may not be able to afford — we still have the gap — front range <br />needs, west slope turf issues, opportuniti es exist — program is up and in pl ac e but not <br />perfect — have some tu n ing to do to make the proc ess smoother and effective — think s <br />the test is still there and leg islature is still watching — if we can use this process well and <br />do good proje c ts, perhaps there will be more $ <br /> <br />Steve — yesterday at CWC discussion re shortage in Seve rance Tax $ could impact RT <br />funding? Harris Sherman, Kathleen Curry, and others there — already funds being cut <br />such as salary for IBCC director possibly being cut — need to balance budget with <br />reduced funding? <br /> <br />Travis — on the front end — project ion of 18 months ago were just projections — not too <br />long ago there appeared to be an abundanc e of severa nc e tax $ -- but now, there is <br />some uncertainty <br /> <br /> Page 3 of 7 RGBRT Minutes <br /> <br /> April 10, 2007 <br />