Laserfiche WebLink
<br />3-24 House Second Reading <br /> <br />Page 9 of 13 <br /> <br />tax money and one of the equations on Page 3 of the fiscal note <br />indicates that there is 1,920 hours at $100 a pop. What that means <br />is that just, that 1,920 just emphasizes for me, it's more debate <br />about water, and but this time we have a study that comes out. <br /> <br />I agree with Representative McKinley because I carried a similar <br />bill such as this two or three years ago, and the tmth is is it is being <br />talked about. I believe that the water Congress is too big. I believe <br />that the body is too big. So now we're adding another layer and <br />tons of more hours. That's why I'm against this. Let's let the <br />legislatures that sit on the egg committees, if anything, form a <br />legislative Congress on water, but let's not do the study. I, please, I <br />urge you to vote No. <br /> <br />Mr. Chairman: <br /> <br />Representative Penry <br /> <br />Rep. PelllY <br /> <br />Thank you Mr. Chair. Well, I just clarified for Representative <br />Coleman that these are not new man-hours, this is the Colorado <br />Water Conservation Board viewing this as a priority and shifting <br />man-hours from other fi.Jl1ctions to this. And this bill is not a <br />study. We've studied a lot. There is a statewide water supply <br />initiative that's going on right now. This is a process oriented <br />towards action, which I think is a key difference from some of the <br />other processes going on now. <br /> <br />Mr. Chairmall: <br /> <br />Representative Larson <br /> <br />Rep. Larsoll: <br /> <br />Thank you Mr. Chairman. Well, members, if you studied water's <br />history in Colorado, you'll remember back to 1922 when Delph <br />Carpenter put together a group that started studying the Colorado <br />rivers and came up with the Compacts that we did with multiple <br />states and using this same kind of a process. <br /> <br />I think that that sets a standard that Representative Penry's bill is <br />now moving forward on. There should not be fear here. There <br />should be looking, forward-looking perspective, positive, results- <br />oriented outcomes that we're looking at when we're getting this <br />group together to start talking and formalizing this through this <br />body and saying all right let's get it done. This is a benefit to <br />everybody. Don't listen to the Naysayers, good bill, vote Yes. <br /> <br />Mr. Chairmall: Representative Stafford <br /> <br />Rep. Stqtlord: Thank you Mr. Chairman. Members, I rise in support of House <br />Bill 1177. And one of the things I have observed in my years here <br />at the Capitol is that we get lost in the debate. Are we the entire <br /> <br />www.escriptionist.com Page 9 of 13 <br />