My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BOARD01045
CWCB
>
Chatfield Mitigation
>
Board Meetings
>
Backfile
>
1001-2000
>
BOARD01045
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 2:57:30 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 6:49:07 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board Meetings
Board Meeting Date
7/27/1977
Description
Agenda, Minutes, 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.
/
74
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 />government. It was submitted to a vote of the electorate in accordance <br />with Colorado law, and was overwhelmingly' approved by the voters of the <br />Tri-County District. The contract was approved by the Commissioner of <br />Reclamation. We assumed that there were no further problems with the <br />contract. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />However, we have been advised recently that there has been a ruling made <br />by someone within the Interior Department that the Secretary of the <br />Interior will not approve the repayment contract, despite the fact that <br />it meets all the requirements of law, until certain subcontracts for <br />the use of water are executed between. the conservancy district and the' <br />water users; that is, the cities and the farmers and what have you. <br /> <br />This is a new requirement. It is not a legal requirement. We think it <br />is part of another delaying tactic to ~gain defeat the construction of <br />the Dallas Creek project. We don't understand it. Yet, that is where <br />the Dallas Creek project is bogged down- today"in the Secretary's Office. <br />The Secretary has not yet approved the repayment contract. <br /> <br />Whether or not we can break this deadlock, we donlt know. We will do' <br />everything possible to get that project under construction. The Bureau <br />has tendered a contract for the relocation of U. S.-Highway 550 around <br />the reservoir site to the State Department of Highways. That relocation <br />wil~ actually be done by the Colorado Department- of.Highways. <br /> <br />On the Dolores project, we are getting much the same run-around. For <br />many, many years, we have assumed that the domestic water' allocated to <br />the Ute Mountain Tribe would become a federal obligation under the <br />Leavitt Act.- This is an act of Congress which provides that the repay- <br />ment of those portions of reclamation projects devoted to use on Indian <br />reservations will be deferred. .The planning-has always proceeded on the <br />basis that the cost allocated to the Ute Mountain Indian Tribe would be- <br />deferred. _ <br /> <br />About three weeks: ago, we were informed that the Solicitor of the <br />Department of the Interior had ruled that those costs could not be <br />deferred and that the Indians would be required to sign a letter of <br />intent to repay annually the cost of-municipal water. <br /> <br />At the present time, the Ute Mountain Indian Tribe has no adequate I <br />water system. Many of the Indians haul water from Cortez. The system <br />that they do have is at the tail-end of an irrigation ditch where a <br />small reservoir has been constructed. They utilize water that they get <br />for irrigation from the-Montezuma Valley Irrigation Company. The <br />Montezuma Valley Irrigation Company is no longer delivering irrigation <br />water. It ran out of water. for all of its customers. The company has <br />not delivered-any water now for over thirty days. It has cut off all <br /> <br />-28- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.