South_Platte_BRT_Mtg_2_Summary - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

South Platte Basin Roundtable Technical Meeting #2 Meeting Summary comments available electronically, possibly via the CWCB website. Larger reports referenced in comments might not be reproduced or scanned. Additional feedback from the BRT members is summarized below. . Two BRT members reported trouble opening e-mailed attachments (PDF format); another member has not been checking his emails . BRT members feel it is okay to reference documents in the compilation of comments, rather than scanning them in, if they're publicly accessible . BRT members expressed approval to share their individual comments publicly Water Management Objectives Sue Morea presented the revised list of water management objectives and subobjectives, based on comments and feedback obtained from the first round of BRT meetings around the state and from the CWCB Board meeting in November 2003. Sue explained how the original list of objectives was modified based on this input. The SWSI team found through this process that there was significant consistency from basin to basin in the types of objectives identified, though there are significant differences from person to person and basin to basin in the relative importance of each of the objectives to the BRT members. The SWSI process is designed to identify and track the relative importance or "preference" each BRT member places on each water management objective. Once water management alternatives are developed, each BRT member will be able to see how well an alternative meets their individual preferences and the BRT as a whole can see which alternatives have elements that can be largely agreed upon. Paul Brown presented an overview of how the objectives will be weighted by individual BRT members and then used in the evaluation of alternatives in later phases of SWSI. An example weighting form for the objectives and subobjectives was reviewed. It was stressed that the "numeric" alternative evaluation process in SWSI is intended to provide information on individual preferences, but that the numeric results serve as a starting point for BRT discussion, rather than determining the final disposition of an alternative. Later BRT meetings will focus on discussion of the alternatives based on these results. The process is not one of "majority rules" or a "vote," rather it is a facilitated discussion that seeks common ground between diverse interests. Feedback from the BRT members on the objectives and subobjectives is summarized below. . One participant asked for clarification on the definition of drought, as referenced under the municipal and industrial (M&I) subobjective. . Another participant noted that M&I providers must also meet demands during normal and wet conditions; drought conditions (with associated use restrictions such as lawn-watering rules) do not always necessarily govern supply planning. . It was noted that turf irrigation, for purposes such as soccer fields, is included under M&I demand projections, rather than being reflected as a "recreational opportunity." BRT members were asked by one participant to keep in mind that irrigated turf is a major investment that many people would not want to lose in a drought. CDIVI 3 South Platte BRT Mtg #2 Summary.doc 4/16/2004