Laserfiche WebLink
<br />> <br /> <br />) <br /> <br />ATTACHMENT NO.1 <br /> <br />January 11, 2005 <br /> <br />Colorado Water Conservation Board <br />Department of Natural Resources <br />1313 Sherman Street, Room 721 <br />Denver, CO 80203 <br /> <br />RE: Chatfield Reservoir Storage Space Reallocation <br />Transmittal of Results of Water Users Subcommittee <br /> <br />Dear Members of the Board: <br /> <br />) <br /> <br />As requested, transmitted herewith are the results of a subcoJJ:Ullittee of Colorado Water <br />entities interested in acquiring the use of possibly reassigned storage space in Chatfield <br />Reservoir. The subconnittee's proposed reallocation of storage space is given in the <br />attached Exhibit A. <br /> <br />In addition, the subconnittee has developed a proposed "Letter of Commitment". <br />(attached as Exhibit B) intended to be used as the vehicle to implement the allocation <br />decision. We request the Board's review, finalization, and execution of the agreement <br />with each interested party. <br /> <br />Please note that the water entities also have pledged to support the estimated future local <br />funding needs ofthe Chatfield studies, without refund, regardless of whether the storage <br />space reallocation is eventually made available. The initial commitment from the Water <br />Users to local funding is for $515,000 and this amount will be increased if more local <br />funding is needed. <br /> <br />Thes'e conclusions were reached from an energetic effort made in good faith by over 20 <br />water entities during a 7-month period. Some 12 meetings have been held to discuss; <br />analyze and eventually reach a consensus on an acceptable reallocation. Essentially all <br />water entities involved have been required to compromise on a final allocation amount <br />less than they originally sought. All participants in this process are to be connended for <br />their constructive role in this exemplary collaborative effort. <br /> <br />I do wish to make the Board aware of one party that appears to not be satisfied with the <br />subconnittee's conclusion. That party is Mt. Carbon Metropolitan District, who had a <br /> <br />) <br />