My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
IBCC Representative Comments
CWCB
>
Interbasin Compact Committee
>
DayForward
>
IBCC Representative Comments
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/15/2009 11:54:16 AM
Creation date
9/17/2008 12:15:35 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Interbasin Compact Committee
Title
IBCC Representative Comments on Visioning
Date
3/6/2008
Interbasin CC - Doc Type
Correspondence/Memos
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
29
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
• Functions for the State: <br />- Facilitate statewide solutions but not get into the direct water delivery. <br />- Supporting a large project - State as the moderator. <br />- Regulatory and legislative standpoint. <br />- State has been in a protectionist phase. <br />- Magnitude of demands is in front of us. <br />- Someone needs to become a champion of statewide solutions. <br />- We all have more to lose than finding a tactical statewide solution. <br />• Water Supply Needs: <br />- 100,000 to 200,000 acre-feet additional water delivery. <br />- Transfer of water out of agriculture. <br />- Both of these things will happen out of chaos or careful planning. <br />• 1177 Process: <br />- There is going to be a block of water that would go transbasin. Here is one <br />protection that the West Slope gets. <br />- There is a moving average number here in what you do under shortage and <br />surplus: <br />? Set up policies and apportionment criteria for the Front Range and West <br />Slope. <br />? These policies can be based on level of service. <br />? Agriculture is not at risk. 11.2 million acres in agriculture. <br />• Rechartering the IBCC: Find a common state agenda. <br />• Challenging the Group: Questions for Areas of the State. <br />- Metro Area: What are we really going to do to continue providing water? <br />- South Platte: 1 million people in northern Colorado. Are you going to sanction all <br />other agricultural conversion? <br />- West Slope: Do you think it is important to have a vital economy on Front <br />Range? Do you think the West Slope would have any role in providing water? Do <br />you support the vision? <br />- What are you looking for? <br />- Does anyone agree that there is an interconnectedness to this? <br />• Every Basin: <br />- Cannot deal with this singularly. Give and take. What are you prepared to give <br />up? <br />- Need to look at incremental development vs. regional development. <br />- Need to look at trade-offs between different solutions. <br />- What you do in one basin has an impact on all the other basins. We need a way <br />to look at the state's interconnectedness. <br />• Recharter the IBCC more deliberative role. Similar to Transportation Commission. <br />- Three areas of enhancement to IBCC: <br />? Strategic facilitate issues of intrastate compact. <br />? State needs to come up with financing mechanism for environmental <br />mitigation. <br />9 <br />I:\INTERBASIN COMPACT COMMITTEEWISIONS FOR COLORADO WATER SUPPLY FUTURE\RESPONSES TO VISIONING AND MARCH MEETING\IBCC REPRESENTATIVE COMMENTS.DOC
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.