My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BOARD01323
CWCB
>
Board Meetings
>
Backfile
>
1001-2000
>
BOARD01323
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 3:00:24 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 6:53:20 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board Meetings
Board Meeting Date
7/11/1978
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.
/
104
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 />MR. STAPLETON: That is seconded and approved unanimously. (Laughter.) <br /> <br />Larry, I take it that the only way we can even .try to be more effective <br />than.we have been in the past is the encouragement of our Governor and <br />our elected delegation. Is there any 9thera1ternative? <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />MR. SPARKS: I see no other alternative except, through the- repre- <br />sentative form of government. The Congress, under the constitution, <br />is the body which passes the laws of the United States. The President. <br />has a veto power, and Congress has the right to override that veto. <br /> <br />We ,thought we had fought some bitter battles over the past years, and <br />we did. Almost every authorized project that we have,took in excess of <br />30 years to get to that status. :It appears at this time that they are <br />all going down the drain if. the :President a~d his people have their <br />way. This means that we have to conduct a very active and vigorous <br />battle internally within the state to inform our own people, the <br />legis 1ature, the Governor and our members in Congress. We already have <br />a divided congressional delegation, to my knowledge, for the first <br />time in our history. The representative from Denver has voted consis- <br />tently against ,projects in Colorado. This .great1y weakens our position. <br /> <br />MR. VANDEMOER: Sometimes I think our congressional delegation wonders <br />if other people are supporting them. I wonder ,if it would be good to <br />make some kind of a resolution or thank you for what they did do in <br />getting these water~rojects through the House. Maybe this isn't the <br />right time, but I know they did work hard to get this job done. I <br />suggest this as maybe something to think about. <br /> <br />MR. STAPLETON: Well, this is ,an:election year. I concur with some of <br />the remarks :that I have heard here today, ,but I think that as a public <br />agency we shouldn't get involved in that action, :particu1ar1y in an <br />election year. <br /> <br />MR. VANDEMOER: Just so they know that the state is supporting them. <br /> <br />MR. STAPLETON: <br />close to them. <br />not all, which <br /> <br />I think Larry and the Board <br />We have gotten good support <br />we were accustomed to in the <br /> <br />and all of us have been <br />out of most, unfortunately <br />past. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />MR. SPARKS: From time to time when some action takes place, I do write <br />the individuals and thank them for carrying out the policies that,the <br />Board has recommended. <br /> <br />MR. STAPLETON: Is there any further discussion on.this agenda item? <br /> <br />--17- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.