South Platte Basin Roundtable Jan 9 minutes.do

• Basin Roundtable: South Platte
• Title: Minutes
• Date: 1/9/2007
• Basin Roundtables - Doc Type: Minutes

Rick Brown: Subcommittees in other roundtables have been formed and are
working well; another variation: one page abstract presented to entire
roundtable;
Sue: for instance, Yampa put subcommittee together to work on scope of
energy impact;
Jerke: I am comfortable with presentation without the need of a subcommittee;
Les Williams: likes idea to have a brief abstract, short written outline then
presentation.
Bob Streeter: Better idea not to go with subcommittees until scope becomes
too onerous and complex;
Sasha Charney (taking place of Pete Fogg from Boulder County): Perhaps
would be better idea to have an abstract and brief presentation before complete
application presented.
Mike Shimmin: Perhaps what we need is a 2 step process: preapprovaI: bring
project to us as a concept; if gets thumbs up, then fill out entire application for
formal approval; because as a member, I need to be able to know that the
project meets all of the criteria and guidelines without seeing the entire project
presented.
Basic differences exists with South Platte and other basins:
1) Other basins have water that they can actually develop: here, unless we go
elsewhere, there is no water to develop;
2) We are the most populated and have most water providers trying to plan for
the future; in other basins, less true because they do not have the compelling
growth to develop projects. For instance, in the San Juan Basin, there are
100,000 people in the entire basin; these folks not competing against each
other; no strain of population;
In this basin, the serious growth demand has the attention and activity of major
water providers here, not through this process; also, many of the other basins
are very organized because their goals are to keep us from getting any of their
water; they are using this process to try to prove that they have demand that we
did not know of and thus no one should look to their basins for water.
Example: energy development: oil shell development.

Wilkinson: Follow up on Shimmin's comments: agrees completely with
Shimmin; we need to start thinking outside the box in terms of what we need
as information; don't think of this as only money to develop water projects;
might need to look at ramifications of ag dryup; or alternatives to permanent
dryup; our roundtable is not putting forth any applications and we are not
putting forth applications; need to put forth applications to ask for information;
for instance, 3 state agreement: how will we find 10,000acft unneeded water
for the 3 state agreement; or the Ducks Unlimited proposal could be a very
good component of that; we should have Ducks Unlimited proposals lined up;
these kinds of proposals need to be put forth.

Discussion on accepting summary/abstract in place of full application ensues.

5