My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BOARD01799
CWCB
>
Board Meetings
>
Backfile
>
1001-2000
>
BOARD01799
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 3:07:09 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 7:02:22 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board Meetings
Board Meeting Date
9/8/1961
Description
Minutes and Resolution
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.
/
104
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 />I <br /> <br />was introduced by Governor Clyde and seconded <br />by Governor Johnson. That resolution I have <br />sent to the Board. (See Appendix B). The <br />resolution was several pages long. I hastily <br />glanced through it and it became apparent to me <br />immediately that the resolution had been pre- <br />arranged since it was mimeographed and rather <br />lengthy. The most significant fact of that <br />resolution was that i! already had ~ certificate <br />by the Secretary of the Commission that it had <br />been adopted on September 1, 1961. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I immediately entered an objection to the <br />resolution and stated that it appeared to be a <br />deliberate attempt to sabotage the position of <br />this Board, the position of Congressman Aspin- <br />all, and the position of Governor McNiChols. <br />I then stated that we would do everything within <br />reason to work with the Commission and that r <br />would even go so far as recommending to our <br />Board that we join with the Commission in re- <br />questing Congress to defer appropriations on <br />certain segments of the transmission lines now <br />in controversy. I stated that my main objection <br />to the resolution was the fact that it placed <br />the Commission squarely on the side of the pri- <br />vate utility companies without the benefit of <br />any study having been made of what was appar- <br />ently a new proposal by these utility companies. <br />I offered to join in a resoluticn which would <br />direct the Secretary of the Interior to review <br />the proposal, utilizing the offices of the Upper <br />Colorado River Commission, to the end that a <br />report be made to Congress by January 1, 1962. <br />I stated that I would personally be willing <br />to abide by a decision of the technical staff <br />of the Upper Colorado River Commission and that <br />the State of Colorado could probably make immed- <br />iate funds available for any necessary augmenta- <br />tion of the Upper Colorado River Commission staff. <br /> <br />I wish to emphasize at this point that the <br />staff of the Upper Colorado River Commission has <br />never made a recommendation to the Commission <br />itself. The Commissioners had never requested <br />that highly skilled and specialized staff <br />to make a recommendation on the subject. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.