Laserfiche WebLink
<br />After a brief discussion following Mr. Ioannides' <br /> <br />presentation, Mr. McDonald moved, seconded by Mr. Fetcher, <br /> <br />that the Board proceed with a feasibility study subject to <br /> <br />the staff's recommendations as set forth on page 3 of the <br /> <br />reconnaissance study for the project (see Appendix Fl, except <br /> <br />that the Board's agreement to consider the $52,000 expended <br /> <br />by the company as a contribution towards the total <br /> <br />construction cost of the project would be contingent upon a <br /> <br />finding that the work previously completed by the company was <br /> <br />satisfactory to the Board, and subject to the three <br /> <br />conditions contained in the motion for the Beeman project. <br /> <br />There being no further discussion, the motion was passed on ~ <br />unanimous voice vote. The next pro)posed feasibility study <br />which Mr. Ioannides reviewed was that of the Highland <br />S~ <br />South~ Ditch, also known as the Godding Ditch (see <br />Appendix Gl. Following Mr. Ioannides'overview, a number of <br /> <br />questions were raised by Board members about the water rights <br /> <br />for the project, whether or not the project would represent <br /> <br />an effort to expand upon historic irrigated use, and the <br /> <br />status of any applications to the water court to recognize <br /> <br />any such increased uses. <br /> <br />Mr. Jack Hill, Vice President of <br /> <br />the ditch company, was called upon to respond to one or two <br /> <br />questions from Board members. After further discussion, <br /> <br />during which the concerns about the water rights situation of <br /> <br />the proposed project were reiterated, Mr. Robbins moved, <br /> <br />seconded by Mr. Furneaux, that the Board not act upon the <br /> <br />request for a feasibility study until such time as the staff <br />