Laserfiche WebLink
situation — a factual situation could not be entirely anticipated by <br /> standards that would be placed in statute governing the Water Court. <br /> Mme. Chair: Senator McElhany. <br /> Sen. McElhany: I guess I understand that. I mean, what you're seeing is that whoever <br /> is going to make the decision on these has got to be given some leeway <br /> and some area to exercise their judgment. So I guess what we're <br /> saying is, who's better to exercise that judgment? Is it the Water <br /> Courts that are used to doing that or are we going to trust a board <br /> which is a new area or a new way of resolving these kinds of <br /> questions. And you mentioned that this would take it out of the area of <br /> politics. And I guess my thought is just the other way around. Is that <br /> we know who sits on the Board today, but we don't know who sits <br /> there in the future. And I guess I have a concern that the Board in the <br /> future may be either too pro - development or too - green, one way or the <br /> other. Are those concerns unfounded? <br /> Mme. Chair: Mr. Kuharich. <br /> R. Kuharich: Yes. Senator McElhany, I addressed_ several things. I said, you know, <br /> in watching the Water Conservation Board, one of the things that has <br /> really been noteworthy is that they have not been a partisan board. I <br /> think they have taken their statutory responsibilities very seriously. In <br /> terms of the Water Court, the legislature found it within the purvey for <br /> the Water Conservation Board to be. vested with quasi judicial powers <br /> as they apply to the current in -stream flow water rights that we have. <br /> We do have that authority with those in -stream flow filings today. <br /> And I would note that maybe one in a hundred actually goes to trial. <br /> We've been able to work with objectors, work with applicants of other <br /> water rights to stipulate out in these cases. Additionally, I think you <br /> have a situation if you have to respond to these filings in Water Court, <br /> Water Court has become a very expensive proposition. To file in a <br /> case and to sustain the case through trial, it is very expensive. I think <br /> the risk you run is that with seven Water Courts, you wind up with <br /> seven different decisions, all having to go to the Supreme Court for <br /> some type of decision. I think it's important to be able to provide the <br /> standard that everyone can work with through the process, from the <br /> inception of the application to the adjudication of the water right. And <br /> I think for everybody involved, it certainly solved the problem of <br /> having to line up at the courthouse. <br /> Chairman: OK. Any further questions for Rod? Yes, Senator McElhany. <br /> Sen. McElhany: Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Another area of concern for me, I guess, <br /> not concern, but just a question is why the holders of these rights are <br /> April 12, 2001 <br /> Page 8 <br />