South Platte Basin Minutes 3-14 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

appropriates, not roundtables; how do you make an agreement between two roundtables binding; Russell George acknowledges you don't, but you bring entities to the table for a process that would use the roundtable as a framework to help overcome obstacles that would stand in the way otherwise; still, up to the parties to agree within the roundtables. Shimmin: own view per Charter: At this time, IBCC does not believe it is appropriate to make anything binding and enforceable and these should be up to each agreement. Kathay Rennels, Larimer County: If there is already a project in place, where does the roundtable come in? Let's put a decision about Alticle 8 language in the form of a motion: Motion: Article 8, Page 7 of draft of Charter: See language there.... Basin roundtables choosing to enter into agreements with other basin roundtables are responsible for the form and structure of those agreements. Where appropriate and in a mutually agreed upon manner, agreements will have authorities and procedures for insuring that the agreements are legally binding and enforceable. Second: John Metli Discussion Fred Walker: uncomfortable with any language that roundtables would make these legally binding; would rather than take little steps and make these nonbinding initially, than if we enter discussion with roundtables, address that then. In spirit of statute, this is voluntary. Shimmin: Each agreement would itself define if it is legally binding and if so to what extent. Metli: Coming up with solutions, would be up to authorities to strike Spann: Perception of what is happening: entity in one basin proposes a project, roundtables have discussion about potential objectors... where does this process come into play per objectors / applicants? Now the battle becomes how do we get entities to come together-basin of interest, then basins work with these entities, applicant and objectors-and roundtables help facilitate this process. Objective: how to we get parties-objectors and proponent- together, to facilitate agreement. Is this correct? Shimmin: that is one way it could work... Harold Evans: agrees with Shimmin; problem with entire issue: as a Weld County Municipal rep, no authority...ultimately, it will be the governmental entities that enter into these agreements. Leaning to item 2: we are here to facilitate... ultimately, it is the entities that will come to agreement... we have no standing. Wilkinson: Thus, per agreements that roundtables enter into: this group's opinion is that our agreements cannot be legally binding on any party. Thus, they would be legally binding only to extent that parties agree.. . roundtables or IBCC have no authority. Rennels: RE: addressing to the extent to which those agreements are legally binding; this tweaking of language says that. But this discussion is to come 4