My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BOARD00100
CWCB
>
Chatfield Mitigation
>
Board Meetings
>
Backfile
>
1-1000
>
BOARD00100
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 2:44:48 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 6:31:40 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board Meetings
Board Meeting Date
5/11/1960
Description
Minutes
Board Meetings - Doc Type
Meeting
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
100
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />MR. SHIVERS: <br /> <br />some material from the Water Congress that <br />you would like to present to the Board." <br /> <br />"Gentl~men, I know you are all aware of <br />the fact that the Special Master in the <br />Arizona vs. California case has come out with <br />a draft report. As far as we know, as of now, <br />there is not more than one or two of them <br />available here. We know that there are some <br />things in that that may be very good for us <br />and there may be some things in there that <br />are not so good. Consequently, yesterday at <br />its usual meeting immediately prior to the <br />meeting of this Board, our Executive Commit- <br />tee by a motion made the following recommenda- <br />tion to this bOdy: <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />'It is recommended that the Colorado <br />Water Conservation Board request the Attorney <br />General of the State of Colorado to bring <br />about a review and study of the Special <br />Master's Draft Report in the Arizona vs. <br />California case to determine the affect <br />thereof on the State of Colorado, and to <br />determine whether or not an appearance by <br />the State of Colorado as amicus curiae may <br />be indicated.' <br /> <br />We feel that there could be a situation <br />where there may be points that should be <br />opposed by the state and there may be points <br />that should be supported by the state. The <br />motion was pPrased for the Attorney General <br />with the natural assumption that the attorney <br />for this Board would be participating in the <br />situation but that the Attorney General was <br />the one who must ultimately make the decision <br />as to the position of the State of Colorado. <br /> <br />Thank you very much." <br /> <br /> MR. NELSON: <br />I MR. MILLER: <br />MR. NELSON: <br /> MR. MILLER: <br /> <br />"Gentlemen, you have heard the recommend- <br />ation." <br /> <br />"Mr. Chairman." <br /> <br />"Mr. Miller." <br /> <br />"~tt. Chairman, it is my recollection <br />there is an old resolution on the minutes of <br />the Board .of some years ago that provides <br />almost exactly the same thing. Isn't that <br />true I Ray?" <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.