BOARD01835

• Board Meeting Date: 11/19/2003
• Description: CF Section - Proposed Statute Revisions - Construction Fund and Severance Tax Trust Fund Perpetual Base Account
• Board Meetings - Doc Type: Memo

:.'.--,.'Ij.o.

~,

,,,
I. .....
..... Il" .~
-'Page't

.' '>- Washington ~oui1ties financed the purchase orwells and w&\ter.rigbts to expand'the District's water supply'
t .. 'lystem) '. . . . '" . .
~~~. :'.:.:.;..:~j " . '. , . . . '; '.,

Chatfield. South Water Dlstrict -Water:- RiSl1ts 'Purchase (H;B. 98-1189); (This loan to. a water district loc~ted in
Douglas County.financed the ,purchase of WJtcr. r[g~ts: The .District entered into' a contract -with the Denver
Water Board to treat anddell\lcr the wate~ to the DlStrtct,) . .' '. .

,.
.~..' ;,'1
:..: . "'~,

. .

NorthemCalerado W~ter Association-....PurchaSe.ofWelis and. Water Rights (H,B.98~11g9).. (This loan to anon-
profit corporation locateg in .Larimer County will f1t18I1Ce.the -purChtUle of five wells and associated water. rights
. that the Association currently leases on an aDl1ual basis. Pi.1tchasing the.wells and warcrrigbts wUl assure ltn
adequate long-term water supply' for the Association's existing servic~ area~)' '. .

. . . .

~ T~.recommendtng the above-described loans to the'Gener,1 AlIsembly,lhe CWCB.exercilied its discretion to
determine whether a proposed project will con.erve, effect mOTe cf'ticjent use of.. develop, orprotectColoraClo's
water resources.

. .
Courts' generally defer to tl1e interpretation of a ~tuteby the adm-inistfative agency' or board charged with
. administering that statute. TivolinoTeller Hou!lc v. Pagan.lnc., 926 P.2d 12()8, 1215 .(Colo.19~6). If the board's.
interpretation of a st&\tutoryrequitem.enf Is consiatent with the rest oftbe statlJte and with the.. statute's object and . .
purpose, a C01Jrt~ not interfere with.therest ofthcstatutc: .anQ.with ~e statute's object and pl:l~pose, a court wJU .
not interfere with the board's cqnst:rucnon of the. sJatUte without a finding ofa clear abuse of discretion by tJtc:board.
GiauettQ OU Co. v."Indus. Claim Appeals Oflice, 931 .P .2d S70~ 57 ~ ~ 72 (Colo. App, 1996); Zagar v. Colo. Dept. of
Revenue, 718 P~2d546, 548. (Colo. App..1986); The CWCB1S I1Pprow.1 ana recommendation of*esubjectloans to
the General Assembly is consistent witl) tile ewes's pUlpOse ~d duties and constitutes .a.rcllsonableagenc)' .
JJl1erPreta!Jon of its statute. The Oenc:ral Assembly's approval ofthe'se loans for the purchase of.watet rights .
((..';)\firms that s1.lch.l~a1is are within.th~purview of the statute. .... . .

..............

:..

. ~ s~ the ewes has acted lawfUlly in making COllstrUQtion Fund'loan~ for the purchase of water .rights.'
Please.let me know if l~an be offurthe:r assistance in this m.atter. '. .' . .

KLS/vcw . .
cc: Peter H. Evans
. Troy Bid

SinCerely,

.~)Jl~_

. '.
KEN~ALAZAR
Atiomey General
(303) 'S6fi-3S57
(3~3) 866-4'745 (FAX) .

. i '

.