My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BOARD00261
CWCB
>
Chatfield Mitigation
>
Board Meetings
>
Backfile
>
1-1000
>
BOARD00261
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 2:47:58 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 6:34:33 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board Meetings
Board Meeting Date
5/13/1964
Description
Table of Contents, Agenda, Minutes and Resolution
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.
/
102
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 />3S94 <br /> <br />MR. GEISSINGER: <br /> <br />MR. STAPLETON: <br /> <br />MR. GEISSINGER: <br /> <br />especially when we need water at Craig. <br />lve've got 70 families with no water except <br />shallow wells and the Health Department is <br />after them to got rid of those. An engineer is <br />in there now trying to get water. This Great I' <br />Northern Project will eliminate that trouble <br />and it will take care of flood control because <br />Fortification Creek will have a dam on it and <br />that's where the flood damage is to the City <br />of Craig is - it's from Fortification Creek. <br />I think it should be considered for the ~~l <br />spot." <br /> <br />"Mr. Chairman." <br /> <br />"lolr. Geissinger." <br /> <br />"I think our Director here has brought out <br />some very salient points in this memorandum. <br />At this time, he states in this memorandum: <br /> <br />'In the first four priorities that we <br />have recommended, there are no clearly salient <br />facts which demonstrate a convincing priority <br />of one project over the other.' <br /> <br />I also want to say in deference to you, <br />Senator Johnson, that certainly if this Board <br />has taken action in the past and they are <br />going to Change it, from a parliamentary stand- <br />point they should revoke their former action. <br />But as I see these minutes, and I may be all <br />wrong, but if these are the minutes that we <br />had in 1957 it would appear clearly to me that <br />the Juniper Project was given the #2 priority <br />in the Yampa River Basin. That was what the <br />Board decided according to these minutes. <br /> <br />Now I certainly agree with the Director <br />that we have to be flexible in all of these <br />projects and agree with him very definitely <br />that at the time 485 was originally passed, <br />and you were a member of the Senate at that <br />time, Governor, we wanted to clearly protect <br />Colorado on all these projects and that's why <br />that list was made. If I'm wrong in that, I <br /> <br />1 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.