Laserfiche WebLink
<br />26 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />1 <br />2 <br />3 <br />4 <br />5 <br />6 <br />7 <br />8 <br />9 <br />10 <br />11 <br />12 <br />13 <br />14 <br />15 <br />16 <br />17 <br />18 <br />19 <br />20 <br />21 <br />22 <br />23 <br />24 <br />25 <br /> <br />to approve it formally, but there is no reason to object <br /> <br />to it under the circumstances. <br /> <br />MR. JACKSON: What are you recommending, then? <br /> <br /> <br />MR. McDONALD: I guess I would recommend, for the <br /> <br />record, that we do recommend it for authorization to the <br /> <br /> <br />legislature subject to the condition that it has to come <br /> <br />back through the formal Board procedure of feasibility <br /> <br />studies and we'll act on it for approval after we see <br /> <br />feasibility studies at some subsequent Board meeting. <br /> <br />MR. KROEGER: You're asking for a tentative <br /> <br />approval; is that right? <br />MR. McDONALD: I guess that would be the best way <br /> <br />to put it. <br /> <br />MR. JACKSON: I think you're asking for full <br />approval subject to that language. <br />MR. McDONALD: Subject to that language. <br />MR. JACKSON: Are you comfortable with the fact, <br />again, that we could stop any of these projects with the <br />language in 16, 17 and IS? Despite the legislature <br />authorizing, we could stop them if we as a Board do not <br />feel the project is satisfactory? <br /> <br />MR. McDONALD: I am on two grounds, Bob. Number <br /> <br />one. it's my understand that in the past we I ve had occa- <br /> <br />sion to bring projects to a halt. Is that not correct, <br />Felix? <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br />