Senate Bill 212 Transcript: Exhibit A-B

Home Browse Search

s would like to speak because I was here in 1973 and in 1972, 1970, and 1971, and can speak to some degree on how Senate Bill 97 got its start. It actually didn't start out as a formal piece of legislation. The Colorado Open Space Council at that time was the watchdog resource manager between that group, Roger Hansen and some of us associated with that project. It was more the adversarial side than the happy harmony, and the idea of the minimum stream flows originated to a certain extent in the Aspen area as you know, and when they came forth with the idea of commandeering water to be used for purposes in the stream, they thought,,at least it appeared to me, they thought they had a brand new idea, and I informed them they dial not and Senator McCormick has already introduced into the record the provisions in the Act which made our project — the Fry Ark Project — a reality, and I can say from my awn personal knowledge that project was not 'has 'been authorized by the Congress of the United States certainly not enacted were it not for the provision of the minimum stream flows that were part of'that package. So when SB 97 wa's being considered by the General Assembly here, we supported it with certain modifications that we believed then, and we believe now, made possible an agency such as the Colorado Water Conservation Board should be the agency. Otherwise I think you're dealing with chaos, and that's been reaffirmed by decisions that Senator McCormick -referred to in the Colorado Supreme Court. We did not intervene in those two cases. We wanted they were talking about our Ovate :r to some extent, but we wanted to see how the Supreme Court would rule. Senate Bill 97 has worked very well to intervene, its purpose and hundreds of applications that have been filed in Division 2 and Division 5 based on and so on, —20—