My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
SB01-216 Senate Committee on Public Policy and Planning
CWCB
>
Water Supply Protection
>
DayForward
>
3001-4000
>
SB01-216 Senate Committee on Public Policy and Planning
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/8/2010 9:03:31 AM
Creation date
6/2/2010 12:06:13 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Water Supply Protection
Description
SB01-216
State
CO
Basin
South Platte
Water Division
1
Date
4/12/2001
Author
Senate Committee on Public Policy and Planning
Title
SB01-216 Senate Committee on Public Policy and Planning
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.
/
41
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
Man: Thank you. <br /> Mme. Chair: Mr. Kuharich? <br /> R. Kuharich: Yes. <br /> Mme. Chair: Wouldn't it be pretty foolish though to go before the Board without a <br /> lawyer? <br /> R. Kuharich: I think if you were the applicant, you're probably right. If you were <br /> someone that had issues that you had to bring to the Board for their <br /> consideration, it probably, it would be their decision to do it or not. <br /> What you have with the Water Conservation Board is a 15 member <br /> board, seven of these = eight of these members are appointed from <br /> Denver and the various river basins, so I think you find a very <br /> understanding and very non -legal environment. You don't have to <br /> deal with rules of evidence, rules of procedure and just can be standing <br /> — can stand there and be heard. Quite frankly, I anticipate that very <br /> few of these water rights would be contentious. And much like the <br /> water rights that are filed on the in -stream flows that we currently <br /> have, would be dealt with in a — on a consent calendar. I think the key <br /> thing though is that all are treated the same way so that the rules that <br /> would be promulgated would apply to all, and that the Water <br /> Conservation Board in making their findings would be just and <br /> equitable with those people. I would note a couple of things. One is <br /> that we do have someone here from Clear Creek that will address the <br /> issue of the ability to sustain litigation in Water Court. And then I <br /> would also note that the amendments that are provided here exempt <br /> Golden specifically. They're grandfathered in since the trial has <br /> basically been concluded. Final arguments are being heard on the 10 <br /> of May. <br /> Mme. Chair: Senator Perlmutter. <br /> Sen. Perlmutter: In just listening to that, you say that the decisions will be just and <br /> equitable. So you're going to sit as a Water Court, is that what this is <br /> going to be about? <br /> Mme. Chair: Mr. Kuharich. <br /> R. Kuharich: It's a quasi-judicial hearing to determine situations of fact. <br /> Sen. Perlmutter: And you won't have — Madam Chair? <br /> Mme. Chair: Senator Perlmutter. <br /> April 12, 2001 <br /> Page 6 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.