Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Members, CWCB <br />January 12, 1981 <br />Page Two <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />First, however, the Board must spell out the -objectives to <br />which the expenditure of construction fund monies should be <br />addressed before it will be in a position to determine <br />which project proposals to recommend to the General Assembly <br />for authorization. This quite frankly implies a reconsidera- <br />tion of the manner in which the Board administers the con- <br />struction fund program. Nonetheless, this step needs to be <br />taken if we are to discharge our statutory duties to promote <br />the development of the waters of the state in order to <br />secure the greatest utilization of such waters and to protect <br />and assert the interests and rights of the state to the <br />interstate waters to which we are entitled. <br /> <br />In light of the above observations, it is suggested that the <br />Board may not want to discuss the present construction <br />fund guidelines and criteria (e.g., issues concerning <br />interest rates, how to determine financial need, whether <br />to require consolidation of adjoining municipal systems, <br />whether to fund projects benefiting only one or a few <br />families, etc.). Rather, we may want to focus the dis- <br />cussion on the broad objectives which the construction fund <br />program is to serve. <br /> <br />In an effort to outline the issues which need to be ad- <br />dressed in this regard, I have set out several questions <br />which I hope can serve to guide our deliberations. <br /> <br />A. Should the construction fund be devoted exclusively <br />to projects which develop additional increments <br />of the state's compact entitled waters? <br /> <br />1) If so, this would tend to exclude municipal <br />projects. Is this appropriate? <br /> <br />2) If so, this would exclude most agricultural <br />rehabilitation projects. Is this appropriate? <br />What balance should be struck, keeping in mind <br />the fact that existing agricultural developments <br />may cease consuming water if they become econom.. <br />ically unviable due to a lack of maintenance and <br />repair. <br /> <br />I <br /> <br />3) If so, this would tend to exclude projects to <br />repair dams for dam safety purposes. Is this <br />appropriate? <br /> <br />4) What uses of water (energy, municipal, ag, <br />recreation, etc.) are most beneficial to Colorado <br />as measured in terms of such things as economic <br />benefits, recreational opportunities, life-style <br />choices, etc. <br /> <br />--'''''1'''~~~.J__.:~:,=]t'!'::~I~r:''___._ ~~",,-_,-~=q::._:.f~, -; '.-"'-"!."_',\""'._~Alq_ ...' '.~_''''''.u, .c,' """""". .~__ ,~.~,. ,-'___L-->.~~_'",____ .__,_ ....--..._. ___~. ~ <br />