My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
BOARD02112
CWCB
>
Board Meetings
>
Backfile
>
2001-3000
>
BOARD02112
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/16/2009 3:12:15 PM
Creation date
10/4/2006 7:11:00 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Board Meetings
Board Meeting Date
1/9/1978
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.
/
92
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 />I <br /> <br />talking to us and has talked to us repeatedly about our efforts to <br />conserve the water supply of the State of. Colorado. <br /> <br />In my judgment, Senate. Bill 69, which has been introduced, is a good <br />bill. It is a bill that covers the conservation aspects. It covers <br />the metering, as far as we are concerned. From our standpoint, we are <br />interested in participating in financing to the end that we can lessen <br />the impact on the customers referred to by Larry, many of whom cannot <br />afford a six-, seven-, eight-, or nine-hundred-dollar bill today. <br /> <br />To the extent that we can participate in assistance with state funding, <br />in the interest of conserving water and getting everybody on meters,. <br />we are interested in that. We are working and. we are working hard to <br />participate in federal funding as well. We will also. be putting a <br />good deal of our own money in and distributing that appropriately <br />through our service areas so that individuals are not hurt as far as <br />the metering program is concerned. This is the position which the <br />mayor of Denver has taken. This is the position that the board has <br />maintained consistently, and we will proceed on that basis. <br /> <br />The matter of making the $5 million available is one that will need to <br />have some future consideration, because it is a three-, four- or five- <br />year program, and those funds may become available on a succeeding <br />year basis without the full amount being necessary at one time. <br /> <br />We support Senate Bill 69 and would urge that it have favorable action. <br />I'll be happy to answer any questions. : <br /> <br />MR. KROEGER: Are there questions from the board of Mr. Ogilvie? <br /> <br />MR. JACKSON: Jim, I understand the problem very well. But what do we <br />say to the people in Crested Butte or Pueblo or Colorado Springs if <br />they are also mandated to put. in meters on some of their older homes <br />that may not have them? <br /> <br />MR. OGILVIE: I think you had better get with it and help them, too. <br />We would support any efforts to help others. It doesn't make any <br />difference whether it is Crested Butte or Colorado Springs or Denver. <br />I think they are all in the same category. We are trying to stretch <br />our water supply. I think that stretching the water: supply through the <br />metering of domestic supply is one way to do it. <br /> <br />MR. JACKSON: Jim, do you have any criteria on how you would use the <br />state and federal and your monies as far as subsidizing some people? <br />Do you have a cutoff line on. income., or what program do you have? <br /> <br />MR. OGILVIE: We would use .this money entirely for the purpose of <br /> <br />-7- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.