My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BOARD01706
CWCB
>
Board Meetings
>
Backfile
>
1001-2000
>
BOARD01706
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 3:06:07 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 7:01:13 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board Meetings
Board Meeting Date
8/2/1961
Description
Table of Contents, Agenda and 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.
/
123
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 />2440 <br /> <br />explanations of how the taxpayers can save <br />hundreds of millions of dollars by going along <br />with the utilities' system. In the brochure of <br />the Utah Power and Light Company they make the <br />statement that this combined system will add $1 <br />million a year to power revenues. Now over the <br />86-year period of study that means $86 million, <br />if I multiply correctly. Yet here is their other <br />analysis showing a $2 million difference. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />The Public Service Company of Colorado in <br />their brochUre 'colorado River storage Project', <br />page II, say that by 1970 - nine years from now - <br />the utilities plan would make an additional $97 <br />million available for irrigation assistance. <br />This is being put out to the laymen of this state. <br />By 1970, even if these lines are built free, there <br />won't be 97(: available. And they go on to show <br />how Colorado gets $45 million out of that $97 <br />million. I assume that figure could be derived <br />from a reduction in the construction cost; that <br />is, in the initial investment the federal govern- <br />ment makes. If that is so, none of it comes to <br />Colorado. We get only excess power revenues, not <br />reductions in federal appropriations. Or it, <br />perhaps, is a figure which is carried forward for <br />50 years at which time the revenues can be back- <br />dated. I don't know. I'm sure the ordinary <br />citizen doesn't know either. <br /> <br />In Mr. Patterson's speech of April 17th, of <br />the Public Service Company of Colorado, entitled <br />'Yardstick or a Lesson in New Mathematics' (and <br />I'll just make that the title of what I have to <br />say here also) presented to the spring conference <br />of the Rocky Mountain Electrical League, he states <br />that this would be $76 million in 86 years. So <br />we have $86 million in 86. years, $97 million in <br />9 years, and $76 million in 86 years. Just two <br />or three days ago the Public Service Company of <br />Colorado presented a new figure to the newspapers <br />of the state in which apparently they had the <br />yardstick system of May, 1960, and the utilities' <br />proposal, and now they show a credit - a credit, <br />mind you - to the federal system of $105 million. <br />It's no wonder that the people are confused. I <br />assume that some of these are typographical errors. <br /> <br />I <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.