Laserfiche WebLink
<br />six million eight hundred thousand'dollars. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />. <br />Six projects have been authorized for construction, and one of: them is <br />now completed, at least the first phase has been completed, the Meeker <br />project, and others are under construction. <br /> <br />We submitted to the Governor's office about two months ago a proposal <br />for the twelve projects which are before the Board today in our proposed <br />budget. We were informed by the ,Budget Office that none of the projects <br />would be funded. <br /> <br />Mr. Sherman and I then arranged for an appointment with the Governor to <br />, discuss this matter. Such a meeting was held in the Governor's office <br />with the Governor and members of his staff, including the budget people, <br />on October ,21 just past. We went into some detail on the funding for <br />these proposed projects. <br /> <br />I stated to ,the Governor ,that I thought that if the state was not going <br />to fund these projects then the law should be repealed. It's not fair <br />for this Board or the people of this state to spend a considerable <br />amount of money investigating projects, preparing feasibility reports, <br />and then have them go down the drain because of lack of funding. <br /> <br />The Governor himself was very sympathetic to the problem and indicated <br />that he would, in effect, overrule his budget people and request the <br />legislature to appropriate funds for at least some projects. <br /> <br />During the course of that meeting, I brought up .the fact that the <br />Congress had just this year amended the Mineral: L'easinggAcLof:1'920:to. <br />make funds available for water projects and other public services under <br />that act. The Governor then asked me to prepare a memorandum on the <br />status of that ,fund and the changes that the Congress had made in the <br />law. The changes were very significant and now permit that fund to be <br />used as the legislature directs, to include water projects. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />. <br />The Mineral Leasing Act of 1920 was enacted by Congress to promote the <br />development of oil, oil shale, gas, phospate, coal and sodium on public <br />lands. By the terms of that act, thirty-seven and a half percent of <br />all federal revenues derived from the leasing of public lands for the <br />purposes of the production of those particular minerals were to be <br />distributed to the respective states from which the revenues were <br />derived. <br /> <br />However, the act provided that those funds could be used by the states <br />only for roads and schools. Since 1920, those funds have been distributed <br />for that purpose. The state of Colorado thereafter enacted a statute <br />provoding'for the distribution of these funds to the counties from which <br />the funds were derived,and to the public school fund under a formula <br />specified by the Colorado General.Assembly. The act was in accordance <br />with the federal act. <br /> <br />Then came the oil shale leases developed by the Secretary of the Interior <br />for three oil shale tracts - two in Colorado and one in Utah. The Colo- <br />rado tracts being known as CA and CB. <br /> <br />-3- <br />