House Committee on Agriculture, Livestock, & Natural Resources

Home Browse Search

we think the answer to these questions are. However, someone can (. come forward in the Water Court and convince the Judge that the Water Conservation Board was wrong in that regard, and it's a higher standard than you normally have to do in that type of case to overturn the administrative recommendation. But it still allows people to go in in egregious cases of error and say, "You guys really screwed up." So it doesn't completely eliminate the issue. It doesn't prevent people from coming in and trying to fix things. Mme. Chair: Representative Plant? Rep. Plant: On the issue of the Golden case, one of my concerns about the Bill— and I agree that I think we need to do something obviously to establish some kind of guidelines. I think that that's true. But in the case of what's happening in Golden, does the decision that the judge is going to hand down within the next five months or however many it's going to be, might that settle this issue for us? Would it be—is it possible that it could be more prudent to wait until after that decision comes, find out where we are in terms of the judicial interpretation of our existing laws, and see what we maybe need to do in the next session? Mine. Chair: Mr. Simms? Mr. Simms: Representative Plant, I for sure on Thursday will be arguing to Warr Court Division I that this type of water right should not be allowed; that the application should be dismissed; that it is contrary to what the General Assembly did in response to the Fort Collins Case, and I find it very difficult to believe the Water Court would not completely agree with me if it had to [audio interference] once or twice in the past. If that happens there would be a need to have, as some of the witnesses have said, some sideboards, to say, "OK, if we can't knock it out that way, here at least are some guidelines so all the people that might file before the General Assembly comes back into session again would at least have to play by those rules. So that's the reason that the bill goes forward despite the fact that we're trying to deal with these in another manner. Woman: [unintelligible] Man: It may be dependent on what the Judge ultimately decides. I understand that, which makes me feel like it might not be the best thing doing now, but if we do this, and I'm just curious about what the legal process is here. Say we pass something like this. The Judge interprets the law and establishes a judicial precedent based on May 7, 2001 Page 14