Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Bill Brown: Motion to make alteration of motion that was passed in November <br />which called for any applicant to present a completed application. <br />Seconded by <br />Motion passed. <br /> <br />Philo Shelton: We need a motion to accept an alternative process for an <br />applicant to present a conceptual review/summary in place of a complete <br />application for SB 179 funds. <br /> <br />Discussion ensues on motion. <br /> <br />Wilkinson and Shimmin: comments on CWCB role: expect staff to summarize <br />to the board to tell us if the application meets the guidelines and criteria; will <br />also review endorsement by the roundtable; will also review minority report or <br />dissension. <br /> <br />Frank Eckhardt: ie.: Chatfield Reallocation Project has been worked on for 20 <br />years; what is being asked for is about $30,000 for this project to go forward <br />Rick Brown: applicant prepares abstract, then in event that roundtable cannot <br />vote on the project with information given, then full application would be <br />requested. <br />Sue: In other basins, kind of scrutiny for applications is being asked of CWCB <br />on statewide accounts; high level of scrutiny on basin account to level that <br />Shimmin asking for; <br />Bob Streeter: Could the template for the abstract contain the salient points per <br />the guidelines and criteria of the characteristics of the project. <br /> <br />Shimmin: shows application: 10 pages long; thinking that this application of <br />10 pages would be the kind of minimum abstract, not all of the supporting <br />appendices; thus, this would be the kind of abstract he would require <br /> <br />Sasha Charney: Basin fund vs statewide fund: difference in level of detail <br />provided; Statewide fund: accept more of an abstract fund; basin fund: look for <br />more complete application <br />Fred Walker: Call the question <br />Bill Brown Motion: Vote: 15 in favor and 7 opposed <br />Motion adopted <br /> <br />Dinner: <br /> <br />Continue presentations on status of specific water activities and task orders: <br />1) Mark Williams: Boulder County Public Health, manages water quality; <br />concept for 179 funding; taking close look at septic systems in the county <br />in areas of high risk, dense clusters, where ground water is high, or surface <br />water high; risk factors that are identifiable from seeing clusters; <br />historically, public health officials know that in these areas there are risks <br /> <br />6 <br />