My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
South Platte Basin Roundtable Minutes July 11M
CWCB
>
Board Meetings
>
Backfile
>
Backfile
>
South Platte Basin Roundtable Minutes July 11M
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 4:17:47 PM
Creation date
7/18/2007 10:34:38 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Basin Roundtables
Basin Roundtable
South Platte
Title
Minutes
Date
7/11/2006
Basin Roundtables - Doc Type
Minutes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
13
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />perhaps this money should be used for projects that would not be funded, such <br />that the funds would be allocated on an "inability" to pay.. . maybe need the <br />money for feasibility study or environmental study; should it be single <br />purpose /multi purpose/multi-basin; do we have a preference of studies over <br />projects; how should these funds be distributed over the state; think of a state- <br />wide basis; do we want to do it by basin, use, stmctural or nonstmctural, <br />loans or grants; cost-sharing or total funding.... <br /> <br />Brainstorming and discussion ensued; following is the brainstorming <br />suggestions in terms of initial preferences. The list was developed based on <br />asking member of the roundtable one at a time. Summarized by Rick Brown: <br /> <br />1. Grants over loans <br />2. Water to beneficial use <br />3. Multi-purpose <br />4. Ideally multiple basin <br />5. Projects over studies <br />6. Concern over multi-use due to limited total dollars <br />7. Supports projects that leverage funds <br />8. SUppOlt for loan interest loan to help preserve the long-term integrity <br />of the fund <br />9. Would like more effort on education and outreach <br />10. Needs to have measurable benefits <br />11. May need more help for needs assessment <br />12. Funds should be used to help meet SWSI objectives <br />13. Urgency of need i.e., mountain and other ground water issues quality <br />and quantity <br />14. Grants over loans <br />15. Needs to have some form oflegal standing not to local individuals <br />16. Projects that demonstrate strong partnership <br />17. Spend on multiple use <br />18. Projects that have a direct benefit <br />19. Multiple use <br />20. Limit grant to a certain size and then require a cost share <br />21. Look at project that provide defined benefits to the state; subject to <br />good thinking by those that distribute the fund <br />22. Funds only when other sources offunds are not available <br />23. No preference for grant versus loan <br />24. Be careful to not wait for a msh to get funding and timely <br />implementation <br />25. Should 6 months be used for disbursement or maybe a shorter period <br />26. Projects that develop unappropriated or new water <br />27. Be specific about multiple use it should help multiple entities uses <br />open space environment, M&I and provide broad benefits to the state <br />28. Emphasize local water development not interbasin transfers <br /> <br />11 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.