Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />of the legislature, they would much prefer to have this type of actual <br />demonstration work done than what they consider never-ending studies. <br />They like to see actual demonstration projects carried on. <br /> <br />Mr. Stapleton: Do we ask for the money after the projects are <br />approved by us or do we have a fund now? <br /> <br />Mr. Sparks: What we are proposing here is that we request no money <br />except on a specific project basis as approved by the board. <br /> <br />Mr. Stapleton: So then you have a year's delay from June to appro- <br />priation and use? <br /> <br />Mr. Sparks: That's correct. We will always have that. <br />legislature is interested in is appropriating funds on a <br />project basis. They have a great deal of reluctance to <br />$30,000 for water-use efficiency studies. When we come <br />specific project in the Grand Valley and show them what <br />they are much more amenable to appropriating funds. <br /> <br />What the <br />specific <br />appropriate <br />in with a <br />we are doing <br /> <br />What we would like to do is have everything submitted to the board by <br />project name and amount. We would then get public exposure on what <br />we are doing and the board can hear the arguments for and against <br />the various projects. Then the board can establish a priority on <br />those requests. <br /> <br />!~. Stapleton: Is this going to take more engineering staff on your <br />part? <br /> <br />Mr. Sparks: We hope that with the staff increase previously approved <br />by the board we can get the job done. <br /> <br />Mr. Stapleton: Are you going to get that increase? <br /> <br />Mr. Sparks: We think we will get part of it, at least. r might point <br />out a major problem right now which is that we are losing 25 percent <br />of our present staff ;n the next few months. <br /> <br />Mr. Stapleton: Leaving for where? Private industry, retirement? <br /> <br />Mr. Sparks: One received a considerably higher offer, more money <br />than we could pay him. The other three are retiring. We are losing <br />two of those people this month, so we are already critically short. <br />We are trying to get replacements as fast as we can. Under the <br />rather cumbersome personnel system, it takes us three to six months <br />to get anybody on board. <br /> <br />-17- <br />