My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BOARD00125
CWCB
>
Board Meetings
>
Backfile
>
1-1000
>
BOARD00125
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 2:45:20 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 6:31:58 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board Meetings
Board Meeting Date
9/23/1981
Description
CWCB Meeting
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.
/
105
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 />" <br /> <br />Members, CWCB <br />September 17, 1981 <br />Page two <br /> <br />reason for this is that there is no way to accurately project the <br />economic benefits which the projects would generate because of <br />the lack of . market to establish the value of municipal and <br />industrial water. In contrast, the value of water for <br />agricultural and municipal uses In the South Platte Basin is <br />reasonably well established. Thus, analyses of economic <br />feasibility can be more readily undertaken for the Hdrdin Dam and <br />Cache la Poudre studies. <br /> <br />In" light of these circumstanc~s, both the Colorddo River <br />Water Conservation District and the Yellow Jacket Water <br />Conservancy District have suggested that the Una Dam and Yellow <br />Jacket studies not include analyses of economic feasibility. I <br />concur since the litmus test of feasibility for these two <br />projects will be the willingness of industrial users to contract <br />for water supplies from each. <br /> <br />Th"ird, it should be noted that while the Una Dam and Yellow <br />Jacket RFPs do not call for analyses of economic feasibrlity, the <br />Yellow Jacket RFP does specify that the study on that project <br />should include an analysis of the financial feasibiLity of the <br />project includJng alternative financing techniques. Such an <br />analysis would entail an investigation of the alternative <br />financial packages which could be put together in order to <br />finance the construction of tHe project. <br /> <br />It is a"ppropriate, in my opinion, to perform such an andiysis <br />for the Yellow Jacket study, but not the others, because: <br /> <br />(1) Yellow Jacket, as a multiple purpose project, would <br />probably require a combination of private and public <br />financing, whereas Una Reservoir, as a single purpose <br />M&I project, could probably be financed entirely with <br />bonds which could be retired exclusively with the <br />revenues from the project. <br /> <br />""' <br /> <br />(2) Hardin Dam would probably have to be subsidized to a <br />large extent with public tax dollars, thus making the <br />question of a private financing package moot. <br /> <br />(3) The Cache la Poudre study will not achieve a degree of <br />detail, due to the range of alternatives which will be <br />under consideration, sufficient to justify a financial <br />analysis at this point. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.