Laserfiche WebLink
appropriation. And then whether there are other factors that the Water <br /> Conservation Board should consider. <br /> In Section 5C, the Water Conservation Board would be required to <br /> report its findings to the Water Court and may defend its record in <br /> Water Court. Now, Section 5B, it grandfathers in existing conditional <br /> and absolute water rights. I think this is important for not only Ft. <br /> Collins, but also for Littleton, since they become grandfathered in. <br /> Section 5E would grandfather in conditionally decreed water rights <br /> and it's my understanding that Ft. Collins still has a portion of their <br /> water right that is yet to be decreed absolute. <br /> Mme. Chair: Excuse me, Mr. Kuharich. <br /> R. Kuharich: Yes. <br /> Mme. Chair: Why would you need to grandfather in existing water rights that are <br /> there any way, aren't they? <br /> R. Kuharich: So that they wouldn't come, there would not be the argument to come <br /> back for hearing before the Water Conservation Board. I believe the <br /> attorney for Ft. Collins is here and could answer that question when he <br /> comes up to testify. <br /> Mme. Chair: All right, thank you. <br /> R. Kuharich: Under definition, the definitions conform, the definition of beneficiary <br /> use to provide that only local governments could obtain this type of <br /> water right. And it conforms the definition of diversion so that the <br /> local governments may apply for this type of water right. And it adds <br /> the definition for recreational in- channel diversions. The standards <br /> with respect to the ruling of the referee and the decision of the water <br /> judge, the level of judicial review, the Water Court may apply to these <br /> types of applications, say it's an administrative procedures act review, <br /> for most of the CWCB findings. Those findings that are not covered <br /> under the APA review would be a de novo review for questions of <br /> injuries to water rights of others. And the prohibition of using <br /> conditional water rights, as well as providing that recreational in- <br /> channel diversions when held by a municipality would not constitute a <br /> domestic right for purposes as described in the Constitution. This <br /> would mean that the municipalities could not take conditional water <br /> rights, convert them to absolute water rights for in- stream flows, as <br /> well as to prohibit the municipalities from making large in- stream flow <br /> filings and converting them to municipal consumptive use water rights. <br /> April 12, 2001 <br /> Page 4 <br />