Laserfiche WebLink
<br />"or acquisition' simply '."ould mean by purchase or gift. <br /> <br />l,~. Stapleton: \'1ould the elimination of the definition of "diversion" <br />create any problems or give an opportunity to litigate closed matters? <br />Do we have a Pandora's box, at all? <br /> <br />1,11". Sparks: ,I think not. That was put in the 1969 act. It didn't <br />need to be in there in the first place. It is simply a definition <br />and the constitution speaks for itself. Nhatever the word "divert" <br />means in'the constitution that is what it means. You can't change <br />by statute anyway. \1hat \-le are trying to do is define the word <br />"beneficial use" as used in the constitution. That is a legislative <br />prerogativo to define beneficial use. But if we leave in the word <br />"diversion" to say "divert" doesn't mean divert; I think we are <br />borrowing trouble. I chink we have the trouble anyway, but no use <br />'to invite it. <br /> <br />.l'.!r. Stapleton: Explain to me and other members of the board if you <br />went over this afternoon to the legislature and testified on these <br />cnanges and they ask you whether or not you believe that this bill, <br />if enacted. would be constitutio~a~, what would you say? <br /> <br />1.Jr. Sparks I I would say that: in my opinion it would not be consti- <br />tutional. <br /> <br />Hr. Stapleton; And does I'~. Moses concur in that opinion? <br /> <br />~11". Sparks; I believe he does. He did the last time I talked to him. <br /> <br />Hr. Stapleton: <br />fired. I just <br />him. <br /> <br />,I am not implying that if he doesn't agree he will be <br />wondered if- y.ou had had, an opportunity to meet with. <br /> <br />cJell. I 'think if we go ahead with this bill, we want the legislature <br />to know that this board had serious questions about its constitution- <br />ality so that they would not be mislead. If they thought it was <br />important enough to attempt to get the Supreme Court to answer inter- <br />roga'cories or any o'cher procedure. I think that should be followed. <br /> <br />Now how about questions and suggestions from other members of the <br />board. <br /> <br />Hr. Geissinqer: As I understood the remarks of the last gentlemen of <br />the ad hoc committee. his idea basically was that perhaps sections 5 <br /> <br />-12- <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />I <br />