BOARD00822

• Board Meeting Date: 4/27/1953
• Description: Minutes and Resolution
• Board Meetings - Doc Type: Meeting

uo

I

which water might be diverted for the development of another
watershed.~ And in following sections prescribes the mechanics
of affecting the foregoing directions, directs the employment
of competent persons and authorizes payment for their services
on a temporary basis, and further provides for a public written
report upon the objects outlined in Section 1, and

WHEREAS, it appears to certain members of the Conrerence
Committee that these two instructions of the Water Board
and of Section 1, of the appropriation bill are entirely
consonant, the Conrerence Committee hereby requests the
Water Board to consider the matter and give its further in-
struction to the Conference Committee to the effect that it
is the purpose and intent of the Water Board that both instructions
shall be carried out by the Conference Committee. and that the
Water Board hereby delegates to its Director, the authorization
of any expenditures made under the authority or the appropriation
bill."

I

The Conference Committee, on that date (April 16, 1953)
recommended that both Mr, Saunders and ~jr. Merriell's resolutions
be presented to the Board for its information so that the Board
might draw up a new resolution to guide the Committee in its
actions and delegate such power as it desires to.

~:r. Breitenstein said that the Conference Committee was
set up before the Legislature passed this Act; that there
was some question in some or the Committee members' minds as to
whether the authority was broad enough. That in view of the
language or the Act probably they should come back to the Board
for some action by the Board. "I do think you need a new
resolution," l~r. Breitenstein said. "I notice one thing which
concerns me. Mr. Merriell's resolution authorizes expenditures
be handled by the Director, and Mr. Saunders resolution says
authorization should be by the Conference Committee. I think
this matter should be given some thought by the Board. This
is the first time in the history of the Board that money has
been appropriated ror purposes or the Colorado River and Rio
Grande Basin. I am wondering whether that money can be expanded
on the authorization of an individual or a committee. From the
standpoint of good running government, it should not. Believe
the State Board should control those expenditures. You are
setting a precedent - what is your policy going to be? The
authority given by the resolution of the Board on February 17,
perhaps was not sufficiently broad. In calling attention to the
ract that the resolution or February 17, stated the committee
shall consist of five members, etc. and that they will be
selected by the Board upon the recommendations of East and West
Slope members, I don't know whether the Minutes of February 17