Laserfiche WebLink
RECEIVED <br />JUN 0 4 2002 <br />Colorado Water Conservation Board <br />KEN SALAZAR <br />Attorney General <br />CHRISTINE M. ARGUELLO <br />Chief Deputy Attorney General <br />ALAN J. GILBERT <br />Solicitor General <br />Hollland & Hart <br />555 17x1 St. <br />Suite 3200 <br />Denver CO 80202 -3979 <br />RE: Pueblo RICD <br />Dear Chris: <br />STATE OF COLORADO <br />DEPARTMENT OF LAW <br />OFFICE OF THE ATTORNEY GENERAL <br />June 3, 2002 <br />STATE SERVICES BUILDING <br />1525 Sherman Street - 5th Floor <br />Denver Colorado 80203 <br />Phone 303 866 -4500 <br />FAX 3033 866 -5691 <br />I apologize for not getting back to you sooner about your proposed undisputed matters, <br />but originally, I assumed that this was an effort to get only your opponents to agree to those <br />facts. Perhaps my original assumption was right, but, in any event, the CWCB, staff cannot agree <br />to those facts at this time (except we will acknowledge that there is no instream flow in the reach <br />of your claimed RICD). The CWCB staff will make its recommendations on these matters, and <br />others, only after hearing from all parties to this case. Further, since the CWCB is currently <br />appealing the issue of whether whitewater structures "control" water "in light of the Colorado <br />Supreme Court's decision in City of Thornton v. City of Fort Collins ", it is impossible for us to <br />agree to this as an undisputed matter. Senate Bill 216, and not Fort Collins, is the basis for any <br />recreational in channel water right. If you have further questions, please do not hesitate to call <br />me. <br />Sincerely, <br />FOR THE ATTORNEY GENERAL <br />SUSAN SCHNEIDER <br />Assistant Attorney General <br />Natural Resources and Environment Section <br />(303) 866 -5046 <br />(303) 866 -3558 (FAX) <br />cc: Ted Kowalski <br />