Laserfiche WebLink
<br />40 <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 />summer I wanted to write down on paper and exchange <br /> <br />letters between myself and the House leadership and the <br /> <br />Senate leadership an understanding that this sort of thing <br /> <br />would not happen in the future, and that it either came <br /> <br />through the full Board process or it didn't. <br /> <br />He said he'd be more than pleased to do that. He <br /> <br />had no desire to create a political process out of this <br /> <br />Board project so I think that's one way we should pursue <br /> <br />it, Monte, and this seemed to be an unfortunate example. <br /> <br />MR. KROEGER: I think your point is well taken, <br /> <br />Monte, and it seems to me like we do have a rather serious <br /> <br />situation. We don't want to encumber money for five years <br /> <br />and yet we do want to give them some kind of priority. <br /> <br />I don't think it's right to get half way down the <br /> <br />way and leave them dangling. <br /> <br />Yes, Robert. <br /> <br />MR. JACKSOn: I'd like to make a motion that we add <br /> <br />the language as it is in Number 15, "The monies for this <br /> <br />project are conditional to approval by the Colorado Water <br /> <br />Conservation Board." It's 13 and 14. I would so move. <br /> <br />It's Meadow Creek and Terrace Reservoir. Meadow <br /> <br />Creek because of the -- well, it hasn't got -- <br /> <br />MR. McDOnALD: I think that understanding exists on <br /> <br />Meadow Creek becuase it is part of our original submission <br /> <br />to the legislature. <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />- <br />