Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />COLORADO WATER CONSERVATION BOARD MEETING MINUTES <br />Quality Inn <br />Denver, Colorado <br /> <br />January 31, 1979 <br /> <br />The Colorado Water Conservation Board met, pursuant to notice, at <br />10:00 a.m., Benjamin F. Stapleton, Chairman, presiding. <br /> <br />MR. STAPLETON: Gentlemen, we will call this regularly scheduled meeting <br />of the Colorado Water Conservation Board to order. The first item on <br />the agenda is the approval of the minutes of the meeting of November 1, <br />1978, copies of which have been sent to the Board. Is there a motion <br />to approve those minutes? <br /> <br />MR. FETCHER: Mr. Chairman, I have one very minor correction in the <br />minutes. On page 36, reference in the second line to "Fisher Creek." <br />It is "Fish Creek." A small technicality. And with that correction, I <br />will move that the minutes be approved. <br /> <br />MR. FURNEAUX: Second the motion. <br /> <br />MR. STAPLETON: It has been moved and seconded that the minutes be <br />approved, with the correction already noted. Are there any other <br />corrections? (NO response.) <br /> <br />All those in favor of the approval of the minutes signify by saying <br />"Aye." (Ayes.) <br /> <br />Those opposed signify by saying "No." (NO response.) <br /> <br />The minutes are approved. <br /> <br />I know Larry, some of the staff, and some of the Board have been working <br />very hard on the State funding for water resource development. That is <br />an item that I would like Larry to discuss with us. <br /> <br />MR. SPARKS: 'Mr. Chairman, we have previously sent to the Board members <br />a copy of Senate Bill 325, which would provide substantial funding to <br />this board for the construction of projects throughout the state. The <br />number of events which are taking place simply demand that the state of <br />Colorado take a more active part in the development of its water resources. <br />Mr. Sherman has recently had some conferences with various federal offi- <br />cials in connection with the President's proposed water policy. <br /> <br />First on the state level, we have a backlog of approximately $12 million <br />worth of projects. with our present source of funding, which is from <br />the Federal Mineral Leasing Act, we are getting about a million and a <br />half dollars a year. So it is obvious that with that backlog we will not <br />have funds to take care of that entire backlog until approximately 1985, <br />and this is simply an impossible situation. We currently have applica- <br />tions for some 20 projects now pending that we have not processed. We <br />have informed the applicants that there is no point in our processing the <br />