Laserfiche WebLink
<br />MEMORA.NDUM <br /> <br />COLORADO WATER CONSERVATION BOARD <br />J. Willi,un McUoll..tleJ <br />Director <br /> <br />November 21, 1980 <br /> <br />TO: Members, Colorado Water Conservation Board <br /> <br />FOOM: Bill M::D::mald <br /> <br />,.. <br /> <br />SUBJECT: Agenda Item 4 - DecEm1ber 2, 1980 Meeting <br />Applications for Feasibility Studies <br /> <br />------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- <br /> <br />1. The notice and agenda for the subject meeting lists 8 applications <br />for feasibility studies. Please find attached brief write-ups for <br />6 of those 8. <br /> <br />2. Write-ups for the applications fran the S. Platte w::o and Badger-Beaver <br />w::o have not been included. The staff has decided to defer <br />consideration of these applications until a future date. Both <br />involve proposed groundwater recharge/plans of augrrentation which are <br />not, we have concluded upon futther consideration, ready for action <br />at this time. <br /> <br />, <br />, <br />, <br />J <br /> <br />3. With respect to the renaining 6, the staff rec<mnends that the Board <br />participate in 50% of the costs of a feasibility study for each <br />proposed project except for the proposed Hyannis Reservoir Conpany <br />project. <br /> <br />4. The staff reccmnends that the Board not participate in the feasibility <br />study for this latter project. This is because but one family would <br />directly benefit fran expenditures exceeding $1 million, were the <br />project to be constn.lcted. The staff does not think that it is <br />appropriate, as a matter of policy, to devote such a substantial <br />sum of scarce constn.lction fund m::mies to a project benefitting so <br />few. Note by way of contrast that Fuchs Ranches, Inc., is a family- <br />held corporation, the proposed project for which would likewise <br />benefit only a few (about 16) family Irell1I::lers. However, that project <br />will cost only about $100,000 and would not, therefore, constitute <br />a disproportionate expenditure of construction fund monies relative <br />to the number of beneficiaries involved. <br /> <br />encl.: as stated <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />~ <br /> <br />...........:.:~=r,,~ '::,).J.i;;:-=,;ag. __ <br /> <br />-" <br />