Laserfiche WebLink
the old law, how does it all work in terms of what's legal and what's <br /> not legal after the fact? <br /> Mme. Chair: • Mr. Simms? <br /> Mr. Simms: It's something I've already written into my closing arguments, <br /> thinking that there's a chance at least that the day after the session is <br /> over I might have this bill out there to explain, and the way I'm <br /> going to explain it is that the issue has arisen, the Water <br /> Conservation Board, and then the General Assembly, had lots of <br /> debates about it and decided here's how we're going to go in the <br /> future. It doesn't mean that they are telling the Court what to do in <br /> this particular case. So that's how I'm going to handle it. But <br /> you're right. It's going to be a rather interesting argument that I'm <br /> going to be making on Thursday. Does that answer your question? <br /> Man: I think so. I think what you're saying is that Golden's pretty much <br /> grandfathered in as far as what the judicial —let the Water Court <br /> decide pertaining to that specific case. I'm wondering then, what <br /> would the judicial standing be if their decision, based on a statute <br /> that's passed almost contemporaneously with that decision being <br /> made. Is that judicial history lost, and this becomes a clean slate? <br /> How does it all work in terms of the precedent that we're setting for <br /> the future? <br /> Mme. Chair: Mr. Simms: . <br /> Mr. Simms: Representative Plant, it's going to be an interesting issue. It depends <br /> on how the court rules. The Court could rule that the old Fort Collins <br /> .. _ . standard shouldn't be followed, that those were unlimited facts, and <br /> that when the General Assembly response to Fort Collins passed <br /> what we called the "Exclusive Authority Provision," that said that <br /> CWCB has the exclusive ability to hold this type of a right in its <br /> channel use of water, that that is the appropriate way to deal with it, <br /> • then I think that we would go on and argue that what is being done <br /> today is for any situation other, so again, it really depends. <br /> On the other hand, the Court could rule on Thursday, "Yeah, I'm <br /> going to recognize the Fort Collins type of right. However, you <br /> didn't meet the Fort Collins criteria which requires control by a man- <br /> made structure, and then application for a reasonable beneficial use," <br /> which is Plan B of our argument on [inaudible]. <br /> Man: Representative Plant, one last question. You mentioned that in terms <br /> of the rights to appropriate, you mentioned that the General <br /> Assembly has the right to regulate that right, so to speak. Does the <br /> May 7, 2001 <br /> Page 15 <br />