Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br /> <br />MR. STAPLETON: I think that's undel:stood. They al:e all approved <br />without priority. <br /> <br />MR. SHERMAN: But that we convey that approval to the legislature. <br /> <br />MR. STAPLETON: Right.. <br /> <br />MR. ROBBINS: Mr. Chairman, pardon me a second, Mr. Sparks, as the <br />designated holder of the jug, I think as a bare minimum ~e have to give <br />Dove Creek some settling time on the water. <br /> <br />(Laughter.) <br /> <br />MR. SPARKS: In:,trying to arl:ive at these priorities, it's not easy. <br />We had three different people on the staff look at these things semi- <br />independently in evaluating the various factors. They arrived at some <br />consensus, and I went over them again. We finally evolved this priority <br />list. ' <br /> <br />Now, you cansset forth standards until hell freezes over, but I defy <br />anybody to come up with a standard ~hich says which water users are <br />pre:f;erred, the ones at Dove Creek or the ones at Keenesburg. Tliis is <br />the problem that: you run into. This is the reason we came up with so <br />many different types of analyses in order to g~t some consensus. Which <br />is more important, the people in Keenesburg getting more drinking water, <br />or the people on Redland Mesa in Overland making a living ,from agri- <br />cultural water? .There is just no way, gentlemen, that you can set a <br />single standard in making that decision. That is the reason we have <br />cranked in all the factors that we possible could in attempting to <br />arrive at some consensus. <br /> <br />We can go step by step for each one of these. We've got thirteen <br />members and we'll come up with thirteen different evaluations on each <br />one of them. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />MR. STAPLETON: I think what I'm trying to say is that the Board wants <br />input, which I don't think they have had now. And after they have had <br />the input, they may come up with the same or different items, and <br />different importance of various items. But I think it's ,the consensus <br />of this Board that we want to go ahead on that basis. And with your <br />help, we will appoint three within the next few days to be on that <br />conunittee and come up with something in January. <br /> <br />MR. SPARKS: What we can do is break these things down - these items <br />down - how they were weighted, and the factors that were considered. <br />Then we may want to add other factors that would give us a better <br />weighted average. That's fairly simple to do. ' <br /> <br />MR. LEI NSDORF: I agree with what Larry says about trying to improve <br />upon these priorities that the staff developed. But I wonder if it <br />wouldn't be worth the five minutes it would take now while our SUIInDaries <br />of the projects are fresh in our minds, if the Board didn't just make <br />its own priority - each individual member - and turn them in for <br />tabulation. Because in the final analysis; it's the Board that is <br /> <br />-57- <br />