My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BOARD00158
CWCB
>
Chatfield Mitigation
>
Board Meetings
>
Backfile
>
1-1000
>
BOARD00158
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 2:46:02 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 6:32:40 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board Meetings
Board Meeting Date
12/12/1973
Description
Agenda or Table of Contents, Minutes, Memos
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.
/
49
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 />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />require a restudy of the project and that is the reason we never get <br />anywhere. As fast as we get a project ready, a new standard is <br />applied and we have to back up and start allover again. <br /> <br />The good news is that Congress is now considering a bill which would <br />curtail the power of the President to impound funds. If Congress can <br />develop some backbone, perhaps we can return to a representative form <br />of government, rather than government by executive order. This <br />executive process has been growing for a number of years. It started <br />even before this Administration, but not on the same scale. Congress <br />has been spineless in the matter of running the country. Perhaps <br />now there is a growing tendency on the part of the Congress to re- <br />assert its rightful authority. There is a bill pending which would <br />make it mandatory for the President to release funds that the Congress <br />appropriates. I think that bill reads that if the President impounds <br />funds, then Congress has a certain time by a simple majority vote to <br />order that those funds be released. It does take an affirmative <br />action on the part of the Congress. If that bill passes, then it <br />will limit the heretofore uncontrolled authority of the President to <br />ignore Congress. <br /> <br />On one of our projects, the Dolores project, we are having problems <br />that are not entirely the fault of the federal government. We are <br />having some internal problems concerning the water supply allocations <br />for that project. We hope to present a memorandum to the board at <br />the next meeting with recommendations as to how the project's water <br />supply should be allocated. The conflict is between an existing <br />irrigation company, the Montezuma Valley Irrigation Company, and the <br />Dolores Water Conservancy District. As a result, we are almost at <br />an impasse on that project. So I think that this board has to take <br />some affirmative action in the matter. Either they resolve their <br />problem or we should move on to other projects. We have enough <br />handicaps without having local problems. When we run into those along <br />with the national problems, there is no chance of getting a project <br />built. We have assigned a man to help that board on a full-time <br />basis now for the last two years. It is a good project, but there <br />comes a time when we can no longer afford to spend time on a losing <br />effort. <br /> <br />On the streamflow decrees, Ray did a very fine job. He got the decree <br />on the Fryingpan River in record time. We have the first environ- <br />mental water appropriated under the new law. In the very near future, <br />we will have more complex filings to present to the board for the <br />San Juan River. We are having problems with. the operation of the San <br />Juan-Chama project, a New Mexico project. We feel that because of <br />the critical problems which have originated in that area we should <br /> <br />-31- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.