Laserfiche WebLink
Mr. Ioannides then presented to the Board the matter of the Limon <br /> Project, which was originally authorized by the Legislature in 1978 , <br /> with State participation set at $831,000 , Due to some cash flow <br /> problems , the City is requesting that the originally approved repayment <br /> period of 30 years be extended to 40 years and the service charge <br /> reduced from 4 percent to 3 percent. He noted that the staff recom— <br /> I/ mended approval of this request. Mr. John McQuay, Town Manager of <br /> Limon, was then called upon by Mr. Stapleton to address himself to the <br /> project briefly. After brief discussion, Mr. Smith moved, seconded by <br /> Mr. Furneau, that the Board accept the staff's recommendation. After <br /> further discussion about the propriety of reducing the service charge <br /> from 4 percent to 3 percent, the question was called and the motion <br /> passed on a unanimous voice vote. <br /> The next agenda item to be brought before the Board was agenda <br /> item 5 concerning floodplain designations . Mr. McDonald indicated that <br /> all of the floodplain resolutions which were before the Board were of <br /> a routine nature (copies of which resolutions are attached to this <br /> minutes) . There being no discussion, Mr. Gormley moved, seconded by <br /> Mr. Furneau, that the floodplain resolutions be passed. The motion <br /> passed on a unanimous voice vote. <br /> The Board then turned its attention to agenda item 6 concerning <br /> minimum streamflow appropriations . Mr. Helton recommended that the <br /> final recommendations for Park County be postponed until the next <br /> meeting due to the fact that the staff had not, through inadvertence, <br /> notified the City of Colorado Springs of these pending actions even <br /> though they have a clear interest in the Middle Fork of the South <br /> Platte River. With respect to the final recommendations for instream <br /> flow appropriations in Routt County (copy attached) , Mr. Helton <br /> reported that distribution of those proposals had been made and no <br /> adverse communications had been received. Mr. Fetcher moved, seconded <br /> by Mr. Getz, for approval of the final recommendations in Routt County <br /> as presented by the staff. There being no further discussion, the <br /> motion was passed on a unanimous voice vote. <br /> Mr. Helton then proceeded to present the preliminary recommenda- <br /> tions for instream flow appropriations for streams in Summit, Mineral, <br /> and Archuleta Counties . He noted one correction to the Catarack <br /> I/ Creek appropriation, which correction is reflected in the tabulation <br /> of preliminary recommendations for the subject counties attached here- <br /> to. He then recommended that these preliminaries be advanced to <br /> final consideration at the next meeting. There being no further dis- <br /> cussion, Mr. Getz so moved, seconded by Mr. Sherman, and the motion <br /> passed on a unanimous voice vote. <br /> Mr. McDonald then requested leave of the Board members to skip <br /> -11- <br />