Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Representative McFadyen: <br /> <br />Thank you, Madame Chair. <br /> <br />I think the point that the amendment supporters made lS a <br /> <br />responsible point. Representative Penry, as you said, when you <br /> <br />have big water projects, you do have environmental impacts. And <br /> <br />I've been in Committee hearings where people put amendments on <br /> <br />my bill that I know are bad but, as commitment to the bill <br /> <br />amender, still things sometimes it can be worked out in the <br /> <br />future, maybe on second reading. And for that reason, I'll be <br /> <br />supporting this amendment of Representative Gardner's. <br /> <br />Chairperson Curry: Representative Penry? <br /> <br />Representative Penry: <br /> <br />Speaker George, I think, had a good <br /> <br />idea and that was to maybe just remove the words "and <br /> <br />prioritize," because that does create some maybe ambiguity about <br /> <br />what priority we're establishing. And then--but at the same <br /> <br />time, you're acknowledging that, you know, flow level <br /> <br />conversation will be part of the conversation. <br /> <br />be a good fix. <br /> <br />Chairperson Curry: Representative Hoppe? <br /> <br />So, that might <br /> <br />Representative Hoppe: <br /> <br />Thank you, Madame Chair. <br /> <br />You know, and I do agree that if this would make it better <br /> <br />to remove those words, "and prioritize." But you know, the <br /> <br />whole point of the CWCB's instream flow program is to do this. <br /> <br />I mean, I don't see need for the amendment. But--well, and I <br /> <br />guess I'd just ask for a no vote on the amendment. <br /> <br />- 7 - <br />