2-07 House Committee Lay Over Unamended

Home Browse Search

2-07 House Committee Lay Over Unamended Page 44 of 49 mutual benefit to all. Although these tend to be three of the more difficult things for farmers to adopt in our every day life, we firmly agree that these primary principles must be adhered to when it comes to working together in developing the future of water in our state. The concept of inter-basin compact negotiation committee presents an opportunity in our minds to facilitate communication, sponsor cooperation between water users, water providers and those associated stakeholders. The Colorado Corn Growers Association is intrigued by the possibility that may occur for all those involved in water. However, in reading through House Bill 1177 as introduced, there are a number of questions that arise with regard to basin roundtables, the negotiation committees and the powers that will be granted to these committees. I have a handout here for you so I won't go through item by item the issues of clarification, which we are looking to seek from the Colorado Corn Growers viewpoint, but I do have four that I'd like to touch upon here briefly. One of the areas of clarification we're looking for is does the current process allow the inter-basin compact committee to politicize the process and inadvertently could that stall or stop a compact of two basins that wish to enter into an agreement? We have concerns with the language that attempts to limit the General Assembly's ability to take legislative action in the future. Doesn't this need to be a Constitutional change? If two negotiating basins agree on a water transaction, why is there a need for agreements when inter-basin compact committee, the legislature and the sitting governor? What happens for instance if the legislature amends a compact that's already been agreed to by the inter-basin compact agreement? And lastly, what mechanism is in place to ensure that this process is not co-opted by parties that do not wish to find solutions and instead are concerned more by limiting water transactions? I think Colorado Corn Growers Association could support something like 1177 . We are for collaborative work. We are for cooperation and simply put, we do control 86 percent of the water in our state. That number in my mind will never be higher, but it seems like what we have here is what I find myself just about on every Christmas morning is we have a box of parts. We just don't seem to have clear instmctions on how to put it together. Well, I www.escriptionist.com Page 44 of 49