BOARD02033

• Board Meeting Date: 5/8/1963
• Description: Minutes
• Board Meetings - Doc Type: Meeting

I

I

MR. STAPLETON:

-'-,V..J

magnitude of either of these projects. We will
pursue that fUrther and report to you sometime
later.

We did get one item which we didn't ask
for, I should point out. The recodification of
Colorado Water Laws was still included in the
Natural Resources budget. This was transferred
to the Water ~oard in the amount of $7,500. So
we have this item which we did not request.

Another item which, at the budget hearings,
we requested be transferred to the Water Board,
and which was rejected, was the item for topo-
graphic mapping. As long as the Department of
Natural Resources is going to be abolished we
asked that this be returned to the Water Board,
where it used to be, to effect the coordination
of the topographic mapping. The $60,000 for
this item was included in the Governor's budget
to go to the coordinator of Natural Resources
so the topographic mapping item was not deleted
from the state budget but was not placed in the
Water Board budget.

That's all I have, Mr. Chairman. If you
want to take action on the recommendation for the
cut in the budget as submitted to this Board,

"

.. I'd like to have some discussion from the
Board. First, Mr. Peterson, in regard to Ohio
and Tomichi Creek, and then on the Upper South
Platte. I prp.sume that the interested areas cut,
if they so desire and could work it out, could
contribute to these funds as some areas have done
in the past if they felt this delay was undesir-
able. I feel that if we do approve these cuts
we should take immediate steps to inform the
effected areas of these cuts so that they can
try to work out, if at all possible, some sub-
stitute measure.

As Mr. Peterson is just about to explain to
us, I'm sure, that if you delay it one year it
doesn't just mean a one year delay, there can be
other things that may mean these things are