Laserfiche WebLink
Land Entity White Faper November 30, 1999 <br />the amount that would have been spent by the individual agencies without joint action. Sec. 16- <br />1-107. <br />The Intergovernmental Cooperation Act was clearly drafted with joint actions of local <br />govemments in mind -- this was a connpanion to the Wyoming Community Development Act. <br />Other statutes reinforce the goal of state/federal caoperation, directing that the governor shall <br />designate and authorize a state agency or department to administer any federally supported <br />cooperative program in the state, Wyo. Stat. Ann_, Sec. 9-1-216, ar ta appoint persons to any <br />advisory planning or action committee required by the state's participatian in federally supported <br />programs. Interstate joint powers agreements are not expressly forbidden, though none have <br />been created. <br />Wyoming's attorneys are of the view that, although the jaint activities contemplated in <br />the proposed Program are not explicitly autharized, provided a public benefit is obtained for <br />Wyoming, there is nathing to bar the state from participating in and funding joint Program <br />activities. <br />c. Constraints on Public Empioyees 13'orking in Intergovernmental or Joint <br />PubliclPrivate Ventures <br />Under the Intergavernmental Cooperation Act, irrespective of whether a lega{ or <br />aclministrative bvdy is created, state officials may participate. Sec. 16-1-106. Wyoming <br />attorneys an#icipate tliat Wyoming-appointed state afficials will be abie to participaie in non- <br />profits or other legal or adnninistrative bodies created to further the interests of the Program. <br />3. State of Colorado <br />a. Constraints on Financial Participation <br />The CoIorado Constitutian, Article V, Sec. 34, provides that "[nJo appropriation shall be <br />made for charitable, industrial, educational or benevolent purposes to any persan, carporation or <br />community nat under the absolu#e cantrol of the state..__" As in Wyoming, this clause of the <br />Constitutian has generally been interpreted as prohibiting oufight gifts. Provided some <br />governmen# purpose is served, appropriations may be made to entities not under the direct <br />control of the State of Colorado. E.., Johnson vLMcDonald, 49 P.2d 1417 (1937) (joint funding <br />of a depression-era jnbs pragram constitutional because the state highway system benefits). <br />With respect to the proposed Program, Colorado expecis to satisfy the ESA obligations of its <br />water users through the Program. This furthers the purpases assigned to the Colorado <br />Department of Natural Resources Commissian to manage and develop Colorado's water <br />resources. <br />A- 9