My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BOARD01764
CWCB
>
Board Meetings
>
Backfile
>
1001-2000
>
BOARD01764
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 3:06:48 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 7:02:00 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board Meetings
Board Meeting Date
2/16/1960
Description
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.
/
78
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 />~............ <br /> <br />MR. BURR: <br /> <br />MR. STAPLETON: <br /> <br />MR. NELSON: <br />MR. STAPLETON: <br /> <br />MR. SPARKS: <br /> <br />I will now entertain a motion that the min- <br />utes be approved as corrected." <br /> <br />"As usual, I will make the necessary motion." <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />"Mr. Burr has made the motion. May I have a <br />second?" <br /> <br />"I'll second." <br /> <br />"It has been moved and seconded that the min- <br />utes of the meeting of January 14, 1960, as <br />amende~be approved. All those in favor will <br />signify by saying 'aye'; opposed - the minutes <br />are approved. <br /> <br />The next matter is that of the permanent <br />pool at the John Martin Reservoir. Larry has <br />evidently redrafted the proposed legislation and <br />expected to have some comments by today. So will <br />you discuss that matter, please, Larry?" <br /> <br />"Unfortunately, most of the comments came in <br />yesterday while we were moving our office. This <br />draft of the legislation to authorize a permanent <br />pool in John Martin Reservoir was forwarded to <br />everyone that we thought was interested in the <br />matter or had previously expressed an interest. <br />That included the various ditch companies, ditch <br />associations in the Arkansas Valley, and the <br />Southeastern Colorado Water Conservancy District, <br />and the Compact Commissioners from both Colorado <br />and the State of Kansas. Replies have been re- <br />ceived from most of those agencies. <br /> <br />There have been no objections expressed to <br />the intent of the legislation. The Southeastern <br />Colorado Water Conservancy District has recom- <br />mended some minor modifications in the language. <br />The State Engineer of the State of Kansas has <br />likewise recommended some minor modifications in <br />the language of the bill. I see no point in I <br />going over those particular modifications because ' <br />some of them, from what tentative perusal we have <br />done, appear to be well taken and will be incor- <br />porated in the legislation. It makes no differ- <br />ence how many times you draft any document, there <br />will always be some modifications which someone <br />can suggest. <br /> <br />~ <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.