Transcript of SB216, Second Reading in the Senate

Home Browse Search

• Senator Fitzgerald: But are we presently diminishing individual property rights? Chair: Senator Entz. Senator Entz: I don't, thank you Mr. Chair. My understanding with the attorneys that worked on • this, it does not. Chair: Senator Taylor. Senator Taylor: Thank you Mr. Chairmen. I am not an attorney and I am not an expert on the Constitution Senator Fitzgerald, but I believe our Constitution says that individuals have the right to water, to that access, and I think that we aren't changing the constitution here, we can't change it so. I think that covers the individual as it relates to water rights. Chair: Senator Evans. Senator Evans: Members, since this bill was introduced, I have had a chance to look at it and examine all the particular issues involved and I think it is a good bill. I haven't found any problems with it. Initially I had some questions about public trust doctrine and whether it may raise an easements issue, but and also whether it some property rights issues involved, but with working with the legislative staff downstairs and the legal and some of my own work and research I think it is alright, and I think it's a bill that you can go ahead and vote for with some confidence that you are not going to be, basically triggering any of those issues. Chair: Senator Reeves. • • Senator Reeves: I believe we are on L017. I wanted to ask on page 4, section 3, when we're talking about the recommendations going to the water court, um, not being a lawyer I am wondering what all findings of fact contained in the recommendation of the conservation board shall be presumptive as to such facts. Um, but to subject to rebuttal by any party. Does that mean this board is an appointed board, the conversation board. What if you have a board that really doesn't like recreational water rights , they may not even like instream water rights, but they, so they have a bias against them and they make recommendations. How much leeway does the water court have, cause I don't know how much that language means "fording of fact contained in the recommendation shall be presumptive as to the facts ", can someone come in? How much latitude does the water court have to make it own decisions and get its own information? Chair: Senator Entz for response. Senator Entz: Thank you Mr. Chairman. Well the judge has the fmal say, its just a fact that the CWCB has the opportunity to address different issues that they think would address that instream flow for kayaking. Chair: Senator Reeves. Senator Reeves: So basically what we are doing is having the conservation board make recommendations, so they are just a intermediary board, but their comments have no more weight than someone else who would like to come in and make comments before the water court and the judge, so they can come in, but and plead their case. Senator Entz: I understand that they in an advisory position and the individual has the same rights as the CWCB when it comes to looking at it. • Chair: Senator Reeves. 2