Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />Western States Water Council <br />Legal Committee <br /> <br />Sioux Falls, South Dakota <br />May 3, 2007 <br /> <br />Bill Hume reviewed the Navajo settlement and the visit made to New Mexico by Michael Bogert. <br />Aamodt is the oldest federal lawsuit in the United States, over 40-years old. But since Kempthorne and <br />Bogert came in, the process for settlements has been revitalized. Other settlements include the Pueblo and <br />town of Taos. Costs for these settlements are very high. Our senators want all three settlements introduced <br />in Congress this year. Bogert has been a positive influence in moving them forward. <br /> <br />Susan noted that at the end of August in Albuquerque there will be the WSWC/NARF Indian water <br />settlement symposium. Also, a conference in June of2008 recognizing the 1 OOth anniversary of the Supreme <br />Court's Winters Doctrine is being organized. <br /> <br />B. Revised Resolution for WGA Consideration <br /> <br />Under Tab C is the resolution on negotiated Indian water right settlements, which has been updated. <br />In reading through it, Susan found one small typo, but thought the substance looked good. <br /> <br />Craig Bell mentioned that this will be in the context of a recommendation that will go to WGA for <br />their adoption. <br /> <br />After discussions regarding paragraph 3, it was decided to massage the language that refers to <br />Interior taking an "increasingly narrow view of its trust responsibilities." <br /> <br />Norm Semanko noted the competing demands for money and the diminishing federal budget. He <br />said caution should be exercised with regard to the use of the Reclamation Fund surpluses, given the <br />demands for aging Reclamation infrastructure, as well as for settlement funding. <br /> <br />Bill Staudenmaier mentioned the upcoming hearing sometime in August on the Gila settlement. <br />Deadline for approval of the settlement is December 31, 2007. <br /> <br />John Utton moved to recommend adoption of the resolution with the changes. Jim Davenport offered <br />a second to the motion. The revised resolution for WGA consideration was unanimously approved. <br /> <br />REPORTS FOR THE WGA - PROGRESS REPORT & DISCUSSION <br /> <br />Chairman Staudenmaier thought the documents under Tabs T and U were very well done and <br />encouraged members to review them. Craig Bell noted that the documents were done in response to the <br />Governors' report and recommendations. Craig then reviewed the recommendation set forth under "Water <br />Policy and Growth," Section IC of the report. <br /> <br />As we looked at ways to address these recommendations, it was decided that one focus should be <br />on how the public interest review under state water law might take into consideration decisions that are made <br />at a local level about growth management and land use. This memorandum basically describes that area of <br />the law and offers some conclusions and options for consideration. It describes where states are at in terms <br />of their approach to this subject. We found that few states have explicit direction in looking at these types <br />of local decisions as they relate to the public interest, whether it involves a new application, or water <br />transfers. Other states have implied authority on their part to do so. The public interest is generally broad <br />in scope, but states appear reluctant to use it very much because it's so general in nature. As we try and look <br /> <br />3 <br />