PUB00150 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Sect iOIl -' 7 -(\()- I ()() is inappl icable herc, however. Ii rst because the Agrecment clocs Ilot "ascertain" or "dcclare" any authority, interest, or right of the Basin States in interstate \vatcrs. I\ather, the La\\' of the River "ascertains" and "declarcs" thc "authority, intcrest, and rights" ofthc Basin States to t he waters 0 f t he Colorado Ri ver. I n 1~lct, t hc states speci lically rcfra in li'olll ~i1teri ng or modifying the Colorado River ('oll1pact: Nothing in the Agreement or the Parties' Recommendation is intended to, nor shall this Agreement be construed so as to, diminish or modi fy the right of any Party under cxisting law, including without limitation the ('olorado River Compact, the Upper Colorado River Hasin Compact, or the Deeree in Ari:onll v. Clllif()l'I1io. The parties hereby affirm the cnlil/clI/cnl IInd righl or cach State under such existing law to usc IInd del'e!op the water of the Colorado River System. Dratt A~reement at 10. Moreover, even if this scction were applicable, it docs not provide the Govel11or with authority to unilaterally bind the state of Colorado to interstate agreements. The statute requires rati tication and approval by all the Basin States legislatures.!1l Thus, even i I' this provision did permit the Governor were to negotiate and sign the Seven Basin States Agreement, the Governor would still need to obtain approval of the agrecmcnt by the Colorado General Assembly. Il. The Governor has the power to delegate his authority to negotiate and sign the Seven Basin States Agreement. I r the Governor docs have the authority to negotiate and sign the Seven Basin States Agreement, the Governor should havc the power to delegate that authority to a representative. Colorado courts have not cvaluated the propliety of the Governor's delegation of his authority to administer interstate compacts. However, the Colorado Supreme COLll1 has assessed the Govel11or's authority to review and sign extradition requests which, while not directly on point, supports the delegation of the Govel11or's authority here. See Mllc/ll'l~l' I'. LCllch, 662 P.2d 166 (Colo. 1983) (holding that the Governor's dekgation of authority to review the legal sufticiency of extradition rcquests to an assistant attorney gencral was proper); see II/SO Whittington v. Bray, 200 Colo. 17, 19 (Colo. 1980) (noting "it would not be proper for the judiciary to tell the Governor how to delegate his authority in extradition matters"). The administration of the Colorado River Compact is at least as technical as the review of the kgaJ surticiency of extradition documents. As such, it would be end that such waters may he used and disposed of by the se\'l:ral states and their respective citizens in accordance with an equitable apportionment or division thereof made between the signatory states by the terms of the compaet or agreement; except that al/Y cOll1pact or agreell1ent so entered infO 01/ helllllf'of'said stafes shalll/ot he hinding or ohligllfo/l' upon any of'said Sf(/fCS or fhe citi:el1.l' fhert'of'lI1/fil fht' S([lI1e has heel/ ['{[tified and appro\'ed h.1' fhe legislllfurt's of'all of'said sigl/ato/l' states and by the congress of the United States when necessary. (Emphasis added). 10 "[A]ny compact or agreement so entered into on behalf of said states shall not be binding Of.' obligato[l' upon any of'sllid states or the citi:ens thereo/,lIntil the sallie has been ['([tified and approved by the legislatures of'all of'said signato/)' states and by the congress of the United States when necessary:' ~ 37-60-109, C.R.S. (emphasis added). 9