Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />don't have any bus service or the same things. We are way out in the <br />boondocks. I think having to follow several of these gentlemen that <br />made such an elaborate presentation, I really couldn't do such an <br />elaborate presentation. We are not going to try to bore you with a <br />bunch of'figures. We know we want our project and we know why we <br />want it. In our area, this past winter has been a bad one. We haven't <br />been able to raise enough feed for the cattle that are in the area. <br />We have an abundance of pasture, but we are short on winter feed. <br /> <br />I have prepared a statement here and I will go over some of it, visit <br />with you a little bit about this project. If.you will read the state- <br />ment on the project prepared by your staff, I think it is very good. <br />It covers our situation very well. It covers everything that I could <br />give you, other than this cost ratio. I don't think they put this <br />5 l/~~ on us yet. I am confused there. I thought we were like you <br />see there, l.33 to l, which we thought was a very healthy ratio. <br /> <br />Mr. StaDleton: Let me clarify that. I think, Felix, if I am cor- <br />rect, is that we are not considering the 5 l/2% in any comparison. <br /> <br />Mr. Sparks: No, we are not. There was a directive from the OMB that <br />went at least to Region 4 which required them to compute these proj- <br />ects on a 5 l/2% rate. And they responded to it. The benefit-cost <br />ratio is quite misleading. It was pointed out earlier by one of the <br />speakers that the costs have continually accelerated. However, I <br />don't think anybody has revised the benefits accordingly. If the <br />costs accelerate lO%, then the benefits, in my opinion, have to go <br />up lO% also. This has been the unfair aspect of the benefit-cost <br />ratio. <br /> <br />Mr. Dunn: Well, I don't pretend to understand all these various <br />figu~es. I am a rancher in the area and I have been president of the <br />board on the Pot Hook side ever since it was approved in 1964. I <br />would like to endorse part of the Fruitland Mesa resolution 1 there <br />are parts I wouldn't. We were approved at the same time. We went to <br />Washington to get it approved. There was Fruitland Mesa and Bostwick <br />Park. Bostwick Park has made more progress than we have. <br /> <br />There are some things that we need to stress quite a little bit in <br />our area, flood control for one thing. I don't think we can put <br />enough emphasis on that. I don't think we can put enough emphasis <br />that we need the additional feed in the area. We need the water, <br />we need our young people to stay home. They are migrating out of <br />there. We would like to have our sons and daughters stay there and <br /> <br />-64- <br />