Laserfiche WebLink
<br />. <br /> <br />Bi 11 McDonald <br />Page 2 <br /> <br />"necessary or expedient for" the specific statutory directive to <br />designate and approve approximate floodplains and prevent flood <br />damage. These standards need only have a legitimate relationship <br />to the express statutory provisions and objectives of section 37- <br />60-101, et seq. See Colorado State Board of Barber Examiners v. <br />White, 485 P.2d 928 (1971). <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />A further question concerns the board's authority to permit ap- <br />proximate floodplain studies which do not meet the high level of <br />detail previously required by the board. Note that no language <br />in section 37-60-101, et seq. or 24-65.1-101, et ~. requires <br />that the board establish standards for floodplain studies which <br />utilize the highest level of state of the art engineering tech- <br />nology. Within reasonable bounds, the board does have discretion <br />in establishing regulations and standards for floodplain studies. <br />See Citizens For Free Enterprise v. Deptartment of Revenue, 649 <br />P.2d 1054, 1064 (1982). The standards proposed in your memoran- <br />dum seem well within the reasonable discretion allowed for the <br />board in their rule-making authority. <br /> <br />One concern, however, is the statutory language (emphasised) in <br />24-65.1-403(3)(a): <br /> <br />(3) (a) Any local government applying for federal or <br />state financial assistance for floodplain studies <br />shall provide prior notification to the Colorado wa- <br />ter conservation board. The board shall coordinate <br />and prescribe the standards for all floodplain <br />studies conducted pursuant to this article, including <br />those conducted by federal, local, or other state <br />agencies, to the end that reasonably uniform stan- <br />dards can be applied to the identification and desiq- <br />nation of all floodplains within the state and to <br />minimize duplication of effort. <br /> <br />Fortunately, the standard is "reasonable" as opposed to absolute <br />uniformity. This standard seems flexible enough to allow the <br />designation and approval of approximate floodplains subject to <br />the conditions set forth in your November 8, 1984 memorandum to <br />the members. A strong argument could be made that with these <br />conditions both the approximate floodplain studies and the more <br />detailed studies provide "reasonably uniform" standards. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />In regards to the further concerns raised by your memorandum and <br />in our discussion, I will provide full answers in a later memo- <br />