BOARD02628 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Board might set priorities for the use of construction fund monies as between different kinds of projects and project purposes. The discussion concluded with it being the concensus that the Board should, over the course of the next few meetings,' con- tinue its deliberations in this matter. In addition, Mr. Mac- Farlane moved, seconded by Mr. Gormley, that: I (1) The four proposed construction projects which were tabled at the Board's December 2, 1980, meeting be reviewed and acted upon by the Board at its February meeting based upon the project selection criteria which had theretofore been in effect; (2) The feasibility studies already under way be completed, but that the project proponents be advised that the Board was not thereby making any commitment to recommend those proposed projects to the General Assembly for authorization; and (3) No new feasibility studies be initiated pending the culmination of the Board's deliberations in this matter. After brief discussion, the motion passed on a voice vote with Mr. Vandemoer voting no. Mr. Jackson then asked Mr. Dennis Montgomery, Assistant Attorney General, for the Attorney General's report. Mr. Montgomery reported briefly on the trial in Colorado v. New Mexico, on the status of the appeals in the Environmental Defense Fund salinity suit, and on the briefs being filed in the federal reserved rights cases. Mr. Montgomery responded to questions from Board members. Mr. Jackson then called upon Dr. Danielson, State Engineer, for his report. Dr. Danielson commented briefly on several bills concerning water rights administration which were pending before the General Assembly. The meeting recessed at 11:45 a.m. for lunch. Mr. Jackson called the meeting back to order at 1:45 p.m. following lunch recess. Mr. Jackson then asked Mr. McDonald for his Director's report. Mr. McDonald reviewed for the Board recent issues concerning the operation of the Colorado River reservoirs and the positions which Colorado had taken on those issues through himself and through Mr. Felix L. Sparks, Colorado's commissioner to the Upper Colorado I River Commission. Mr. McDonald next reported on the meeting to be held in Grand Junction on January 23rd between Dr. Danielson, Mr. Pascoe, Mr. Montgomery and himself on the one hand and repre- sentatives of western slope water users on the other. He noted that the purpose of the meeting was to discuss matters concerning the waters of the White River and Colorado's entitlement thereto. Mr. McDonald next reported on the status of the proposed White River Study being formulated by a consortium of oil shale companies and the Yellow Jacket Water Conservancy District. -2-