Laserfiche WebLink
concern that any legislation not set precedents inimical <br /> to its interests in that the District is of the opinion <br /> that CBT project revenues, when that project is paid <br /> out, should and will be available for that District' s <br /> use. <br /> ( 2) Should revenues from Ruedi Reservoir be limited to use <br /> on yet to be constructed, federal projects <br /> (for either repayment or potential "up-front" financing <br /> requirements )? <br /> (3) Should revenues be made directly payable to Colorado <br /> rather than being subject to the Secretary of the <br /> Interior 's control (see section 4 of the draft <br /> legislation)? <br /> (4) Do the Fry-Ark Project Operating Principles have to be <br /> amended to permit the disposition of future revenues <br /> (see section 5 of the draft legislation)? Is it prudent <br /> to open up the Operating Principles to discussion? <br /> ( 5) What are the risks of proposing legislation such as this <br /> to Congress? Do we stand to lose more than might be <br /> gained? <br /> Recommendation <br /> I recommend that the Board instruct the staff to work with <br /> interested parties in revising the proposed legislation for <br /> further consideration at a subsequent Board meeting(s) in an <br /> effort to resolve the issues cited above . <br /> JWM/gl <br /> Attachments as stated <br /> s <br /> MEMORANDUM -2- August 31, 1983 <br />