My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BOARD02091
CWCB
>
Board Meetings
>
Backfile
>
2001-3000
>
BOARD02091
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 3:11:37 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 7:09:55 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board Meetings
Board Meeting Date
3/16/1978
Description
Agenda, Minutes, 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.
/
58
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 />Now, at the end of February, it was necessary, if the districts were <br />going to continue their approach and attitude toward the instream flow <br />matters, we had to file the obj.ections, statements of opposition, to <br />those that had been filed in Water Districts 4, 5, and 6, at least <br />within those districts. I don't know what happened in 7 and 1, 2, and <br />3--at a time when the question of the constitutionality of the law and <br />other material matters concerning that law were in dispute. <br />- . <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />Now, in order to complete this filing in Division 6 alone, it was <br />necessary to hand- carry to steamboat Springs about 1,400 pages of dupli- <br />cation. That was the necessary number of pieces of paper to file state- <br />ments of opposition in that water district. <br /> <br />Those that are involved--the 12 don't make much difference from that <br />standpoint--those that are involved, not only on those 12 but also those <br />on the list fOr first consideration today, approximately intpe <br />neighborhood of 70 claims, requiring just as far as the opposition is <br />concerned, 5 pages times 4, or 20 pages per claim. Now, in our office, <br />the Xerox machine, just the cost of Xeroxing is about $.4~ a sheet. So <br />we are approaching $75 in duplication alone, leaving out the cost of the <br />state to run the applications. The' cost to the state, and it is not <br />free--although neither party is paying any docket fee--the cost to run <br />it in the newspaper' and the cost to everybody o'f counsel and inv1sti- <br />gation to see what is involved.- So the cost of every claim, I would <br />say is approximating, insofar as opposition is concerned, about 25 to <br />$50 a claim. So I wonder if it is possible for the Board to give <br />serious consideration to tabling these claims until the matter is <br />resolved. <br /> <br />Schedule-wise, all of the briefs are in Division 5. That is where the <br />present litigation is concerned. I think Mr. Robbins'will bear this <br />out. The question about whether or not Judge Lohr will sit on it or not <br />will come up a week from tomorrow in his court. Whoever the district <br />judge is that will decide the matter will probably be designated, if <br />Judge Lohr doesn't hear it,' within about ten days after that. We know <br />it is going to the Supreme Court. We know what the lower court is going <br />to do. All the papers say it will go to the Supreme Court. <br /> <br />Now, can't the Board sit on these matters, whether good, bad, or <br />indifferent, and quit spending the public money, which is poured down <br />the rat hole? If the statute is unconstitutional, all this work is for <br />naught. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />So I get paid for filing a protest. The referees are not sitting on it, <br />Obviously. But I think we are putting good money possibly after bad, <br />and you are really not hurt by the delay. If you just waited until the <br />district judge acted, I think we would be probably money ahead. I <br />don.'t see why it just keeps piling up. And I suggest to you the possible <br />inference that this board keeps right on with the filings, irrespective <br />of the legality of the law; therefore, they are 100 percent behind it. <br />I think that is already evident--that those that were in contest were <br />filed. <br /> <br />My objection goes to the wasting of taxpayers' money, which may be <br /> <br />-11- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.