My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BOARD01303
CWCB
>
Board Meetings
>
Backfile
>
1001-2000
>
BOARD01303
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 3:00:08 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 6:53:05 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board Meetings
Board Meeting Date
1/14/1960
Description
Minutes
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.
/
103
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 />1778 <br /> <br />MR. SPARKS: <br /> <br />MR. STAPLETON: <br /> <br />MR. EAKES: <br /> <br />"Congressman Aspinall made it very clear <br />that this was a state problem and not a Con- <br />gressional problem. I might add that Congress- <br />man Aspinall has some ideas of his own about <br />this bill which he, himself, will take care of <br />in Congress. He said this portion of it, ~nd I <br />the policy, must be established here. And what's <br />established here would receive his approval in <br />any subsequent negotiations with the New Mexico <br />Congressional delegation. He said that policy <br />was a matter to be established by the State of <br />Colorado and that he would then attempt to <br />carry it through in the Congress." <br /> <br />"Are there any further comments from mem- <br />bers of the Board?" <br /> <br />Mr. Eakes." <br /> <br />"Mr. Chairman, I've had one worry about <br />this form of procedure that I have sta.te.d'.to. <br />everyone that's been working on it and I want <br />to state it for the record. I'm not at ali sure <br />that trying to accomplish here by amendments to <br />a bill is the most satisfactory procedure. <br />Legislation - a bill like this authorizing the <br />construction of a project or projects - can at <br />a later date be amended. It's just an,l act of <br />the United States Congress and they can pass <br />another act to repeal it or adopt a new one <br />that might have different terms, that might be <br />a bit formidable to our position. I have felt, <br />and have always felt, and have expressed that <br />time and time again, that the only way I think <br />this can be done for full security is by the <br />negotiation of a compact between the two states, <br />and the negotiation of a compact between the <br />two states was contemplated by the members of <br />the commission that negotiated the Upper Colo- <br />rado River Compact. <br /> <br />I have some reservations in my mind as to <br />whether this will ultimately secure the problem <br />as it should be done. However, I can only say I <br />this is certainly a long, long way. in the direc- <br />tion that we favor in the protection of Colo~ <br />rado rights. If this is the best solution <br />that can be arrived at in this matter, then cer- . <br />tainly we will support it. If the compact pro- <br />cedure can be used, I think we would feel more <br />secure under it." <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.