Laserfiche WebLink
<br />exaggerated their use in order to cut down on appropriated water. Be aware of <br />this mmor. <br />--Bill: Sounds like we want to hear from SWSI. When and what? Feb or March <br />meeting? Every other month situation? <br />--Eric: In these initial stages of the IBCC, we want to make sure there is feedback <br />fi-om roundtables to IBCC. Other roundtables will meet monthly while IBCC <br />working on charter. Then later, meet less frequently. DNR suggests that it would <br />be useful to have SWSI presentations before the new information comes out in <br />May. <br />Three steps: 1) Overview of SWSI; 2) Session that goes deeper into supply and <br />demand within the basin; and 3) Session to help roundtable understand gap. <br /> <br />3) Bill J continues discussion on Proposed Agenda for 2006 and asks for input into <br />how we investigate our "Shared Values and Direction for our IBCC Reps." <br />Bill Brown: Go for it; don't give away water; get some if you can@ <br />They will be working on charter; too early for us to give them specific direction. <br />Eric: Charter will set up framework by which substantive conversations will <br />happen. We want to make sure people in state are comfortable with the time <br />frame of the process. Working with CSU and IBCC facilitators to put together a <br />draft charter where committee will make choices of where they want to go; <br />Tom: Is there an established timeline when IBCC will get into substantive <br />conversations? Do we have time to figure out issues? <br />Eric: hope is to submit charter this session; but the actual deadline is July. <br />Bill: how much tmst do we give to Mike and Eric for the Charter. <br />John: get charter done; tmst is in Mike and Eric. <br />Steve: suppose that the charter has something we want changed? <br />Eric: there will be something in the charter for amendments. <br />Bill: remember no one is drafting statutes; no change in state constitution or <br />statutes. <br />Fred: Mission statement that we drafted should be a useful guide for our IBCC <br />reps. <br />Bill: Will the charter be changed into a statute? <br />Eric H: Governor must sign it; but idea would be more that the charter would be <br />approved or disapproved as submitted. <br />Eric W.: Look at statute: a few things to think about per feedback: for example: <br />What is the role of the roundtable in the promotion of projects? Do we see the <br />roundtables playing an active role in the promotion of projects? Asserting <br />ourselves as advocates or challengers to projects? Or do we stay out of it unless <br />asked to be an advocate or challenger? If we have a project going forward, such <br />as 80% solution proposed by SWSI, do we as a roundtable stay out of it or do we <br />actively advocate? Per negotiation framework in the statute: how tight to we want <br />that fi-amework or do we want our reps to go forward with general understanding? <br />Mike S: Related issue that is fundamental to this process: there is a tension in the <br />statute between the idea of having inter-basin compacts--because a compact <br />model is developed where states are allocating rivers among themselves and the <br />basic tenant of CO water law which is that we do not appropriate water between <br /> <br />4 <br />