My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
House Committee on Agriculture, Livestock, & Natural Resources
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
DayForward
>
3001-4000
>
House Committee on Agriculture, Livestock, & Natural Resources
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/8/2010 9:03:21 AM
Creation date
6/2/2010 11:18:11 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
Description
SB01-216
State
CO
Basin
South Platte
Water Division
1
Date
5/7/2001
Title
House Committee on Agriculture, Livestock, & Natural Resources
Water Supply Pro - Doc Type
Minutes
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
24
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
can do this, they can also say, "except in these circumstances." So <br /> it's not something that would be contrary to Supreme Court law and <br /> it would not be something that would be contrary to any given <br /> doctrine that affects Colorado water law in general. <br /> That's a very brief view of my comments. If anyone had any <br /> questions I'd be glad to answer them. <br /> Mme. Chair: Thank you, Steve. Representative Johnson? <br /> Mr. Johnson: Thank you, Madam Chairman. So tell me again why, if I have a <br /> conditional water right, and now this legislation's telling me I can't <br /> change it to a recreational right, why is that not a diminution of my <br /> property right? <br /> Mme. Chair: Steve? <br /> S. Simms: The statute itself says that you can change your conditional water <br /> right. However, basically what it does is that it would still allow you <br /> to change to any other use. It might remove one market from you, <br /> but this is a market that has been removed for everybody. In other <br /> words, right now the only people that can use water in channel is the " <br /> Water Conservation group. This particular right was removed from <br /> them long ago. It's not something that's ever been done with <br /> anyone, so it is speculative at best to say that there's a lot of people <br /> lined up to do this. I guess if you say that removes one potential <br /> customer, you could say there would be some diminution, but it's <br /> certainly proper exercise of the General Assembly's power to do <br /> that. <br /> Mme. Chair: Thank you. Does that explain his plan? <br /> Mr. Johnson: Thank you, Madam Chair. I just have a couple of questions. I'm not <br /> a lawyer —you are. Your [unintelligible] presumption —can you talk <br /> a little bit about what [audio interference] establish when you say <br /> that the CWCB people have a [unintelligible] presumption <br /> [inaudible]? <br /> Mme. Chair: Mr. Simms? <br /> Mr. Simms: Representative Plant, who is my representative — <br /> Man: Another year- and -a -half. <br /> Man: Representative Plant, basically rebuttable presumption says we've <br /> gone out and held the hearings, we've found the facts, this is what <br /> May 7, 2001 <br /> Page 13 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.