BOARD01143

• Board Meeting Date: 12/11/1953
• Description: Minutes and Resolution
• Board Meetings - Doc Type: Meeting

315

If this Board, as an administrative agenc,y of the Executive
Department of the State, approves the claim of Denver prior
to the determination of the litigation in both the State and
Federal courts, such action may legitimately be regarded as
an effort to influence the outcome of that litigation a.'ld con-
stitutes, directly or indirectly, an interference with the
orderly processes of the administration of justice.

I

We disagree with those who assert that under the Colorado
River Compact and the Upper Colorado River Basin Compact
_ OoloI'Gdo may lose the percentage of consumptive use of the
waters of the Colorado iliver allotted to her if other states
proceed to make prior use of such water. Said arguments are
made by those who would use pressure methods to accomplish
an immediate end. The use of water allocated to Colorado
under the Upper Colorado River Basin Compact is in perpetuity
and permits this State to proceed in an orderly way with a
plan of development based on thorough investigation' instead
of the piecemeal, opportunistic 8nd propagandized plan now
suggested for the benefit of the City and County of Denver.

We realize that many of the members of the Colorado State
Water Board are public officials or persons, who, in their
capacity as members, act as laymen and not as technical,
legal or engineering advisors of the Board. Under such
circumstances the Board relies on the advice of its technical
advisors.

We apprehend that the Colorado State Water Board approaches
the consideration of the request of the City and County of
Denver to take water from the Blue River under the impression
that an emergency exists. The alleged emergency does not
exist, as we have urged in the courts, and will continue to
urge in any impartial forum.

The asserted emergency has arisen from the ultimatum of Denver
that a feature in the nature of a participating project be
included in the proposed Colorado Storage Project and frOm the
newspaper propaganda which has been fostered by Denver to con-
vince the public and every department of government .that might
be influenced by public opinion that such emergency is real and
not designed.

We condemn as wholly foreign t.o the proper exercise of their
legitimate functions the unusual efforts made by the official
representative of Colorado on the Upper Colorado River Com-
mission and by the Secretary of said Commission to compel ac-
ceptance at ar~'cost the belated demand of Denver that a Denver
project 'be included as a feature of the Colorado River Storage
Project.

I