Board Meeting 03/08/1995

• Board Meeting Date: 3/8/1985
• Description: Minutes, Agenda, Memorandums March 8, 1985
• Board Meetings - Doc Type: Meeting

- 4
knowledge, not been formally presented to Reclamation, it is the
understanding that such a plan is not acceptable to the Commis-
sioner. No other new proposals for funding CREST were presented.
Although no formal action was taken, the Board by consensus
maintained its position with respect to CREST funding as expressed
in motions adopted at the July 13, 1984, and January 14-15 , 1985,
meetings. -
Agenda Item 3.z . esident's FY 1986 Budget\ (Appendix I attached)
Mr. McDonald reported that the President's FY 86 budget request
for the Bureau of Reclamation and the Corps of Engineers was
forwarded to Congress in early February. Table 1 attached to
Appendix I is a summary of the funds requested for projects under
or ready for construction in Colorado. This table also shows a
comparison of FY 86 budget requests to funds appropriated in FY
1985. Funds requested for FY 1986 are about $28 million less than
funds available in FY 85.
The House and Senate Appropriations Committees will hear public
, `- testimony on the FY 86 budget during the week of April 1. Mr.
McDonald has requested time to present oral testimony on behalf of
the Board.
In preparation for the hearings, Mr. McDonald drafted a state-
ment. The key issues for the Board are what positions to take on
construction funding for the Animas-La Plata and Narrows projects
(not funded in the President' s budget) , the Paradox and Grand
Valley salinity control units, which show substantial cuts in
funding) , and the Westerly Creek flood control project (which the
Board and local sponsors have been seeking for a number of years) .
In his draft statement, Mr. McDonald proposed that Colorado
reque-t the following:
Ml $1. 35 million for a construction start on the Animas-
�f La Plata project
2. �assification of the $500,000 included in the President's
budget for the Narrows project as a construction start
(Although these funds were included in the construction
category, they would be used exclusively for preconstruc-
tion activities .'
3. increase in construction funding for the Paradox
Valley and Grand Valley salinity control units to $8 .4
million and $5. 7 million, respective1yj oc 2.
4. ,a $300,000appropriation for continuing planning and
engineering on the Westerly Creek flood control project
in Denver and Aurora 0
-14-