Laserfiche WebLink
<br />I <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />and 6 of article XVI don't necessarily relate and that the suggestions <br />made here to remove the definition of "diversion" and substitute <br />"appropriation" would mean that the state in proceeding to appropriate <br />waters would be moving under section 5. Is that correct? In other <br />\"ords, to remove the ques'don that here we are going to permit the <br />state to do certain things and we don't \'lant to get fouled up because <br />other people also have the right to divert and their rights shall not <br />be denied under 5. That your approach goes to trying to keep those <br />two sections separated as much as possible and then have the state <br />move under 5 to appropria'te and acquire unappropriated waters of the <br />state. Then those that are not appropriated either in that manner or <br />have not been previously appropriated would fall in the category of <br />permitting others to divert. <br /> <br />i-~. Scott: That is the \'lay I look a't it. I don't know if the other <br />la~"Yers agree with that or not. <br /> <br />Mr. StaDleton: Ken, do you have any thoughts about these proposed <br />amendments? <br /> <br />Hr. Broadhurst: No, I really don't. Ben. As a member of the committee <br />it was just a consensus to come up with 97 in its present form. l1e <br />haven't seen its final form. It may be amended further. <br /> <br />Mr. Stapleton: That's always what scares me. <br /> <br />i-~. Broadhurst: That is why I thought I would rather be silent. ~fuen <br />you start changing the language all around, then I don't know what it <br />is going to result in. <br /> <br />t~. StaDleton: Of course. the great danger is getting it amended on <br />the last day on the floor. Then anything can happen. <br /> <br />Hr-. Broadhurst: At least you had kind of a consensus of the people <br />that were willing to buy that language as it was stated and not as it <br />would be in trying to get people to do all kinds of things. <br /> <br />l,lr. Stapleton: Well. I vlould say tha't what the board may do is to <br />approve it in principle. lIe may proceed on that basis because lav~ers <br />are obviously not going to be able to approve all the language and <br />there has to be a compromise. There are two ways to go with this. <br />First. I think we should consider whether we ought to go with Senate <br />Bill 97 as drafted. If \'le approve that. 1;~. Balcomb has said that <br />that cuts the heart out of the constitutional amendment. He didn't <br /> <br />-13- <br />