Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District Minutes June 16 2005

Home Browse Search

SECWCD June 16, 2005 6 RECORD OF PROCEEDING case, Mr. Leonhardt's argument addressed the facts and law supporting the Water Court's dismissal of ISG's case (even though no motion for summary judgment was filed), as well as ISG's arguments regarding temporary leasing plans and the Water Court's award of costs to Southeastern. Mr. Leonhardt reported that the Justices were well prepared with a number of good questions for the attorneys on both sides. Mr. Leonhardt reported in the Chaffee County recreational in- channel diversion (RICD) case, legal counsel represented the District at the Colorado Water Conservation Board (CWCB) hearing held on May 23 and 24 near Salida. The RICD requires the CWCB to make findings on such matters as whether the RICD would promote maximum utilization of Colorado waters and whether it would impair Colorado's ability to fully develop and place beneficial consumptive use its compact entitlements. Bob Hamilton testified for Southeastern that for much of the year, the current RICD proposal would promote maximum utilization by supporting the Voluntary Flow Management Program for the Upper Arkansas River, but that the high flows of 1,800 cfs. ,aimed from May 16 — June 30 would impede these goals by greatly reducing and sometimes eliminating exchange potential for future exchanges. On the morning of May 24, the CWCB decided to postpone action on its findings and recommendations until its September meeting, based on testimony by Chaffee County, the Southeastern District, and some other parties that they are engaged in settlement negotiations through which they hope to resolve many issues in the case by the end of August. The Board was provided copies of a memorandum that further discusses the CWCB hearing and the main issues in ongoing settlement negotiations. The next settlement meeting has been set for June 30. Mr. Leonhardt discussed with the Board several of the issues raised in settlement negotiations involving a proposed memorandum of understanding and Chaffee County's proposed consent decree. Mr. Leonhardt reported that at Chaffee County's request, last month the Water Referee rereferred the RICD case to the Water Judge. Some of the objectors, including Southeastern, have asked that Chaffee County and other parties agree to postpone taking discovery or imposing her litigation burdens on the objectors until after the September 16 deadline for the CWCB to submit its findings to the Water Court. It appears that Chaffee County will agree to that request. Mr. Leonhardt reported in Aurora's Rocky Ford Ditch exchange case (No. 99CW170(A), last month legal counsel signed the final stipulation with the Bureau of Reclamation and Aurora, confirming Reclamation's requested change to the proposed decree previously approved by the Southeastern Distrct, after receiving the fully executed MOU between Southeastern, Aurora, and Reclamation on the Pueblo Reservoir spill order (as approved by the District Board in February). Aurora has entered settlements with all of the opposers, except for one set of individuals not represented by an attorney, who have stated they will not participate in any trial of the case; therefore, Aurora has filed a motion for entry of a decree that is consistent with the proposed decree approved by Southeastern's most recent stipulation.