<br />-6-
<br />
<br />Rod Kuharich, CWCB - I am amazed that with all the Corps resources they cannot review this report, I buy
<br />this PMP study in a heartbeat because I know these storms are influenced by the topography and I live a few
<br />miles from this basin, I think we can do this with some revision to the language; if through peer review we
<br />find the PMP is not big enough then it's not big enough, As a state we need to respond to the wishes of the
<br />local communities,
<br />
<br />Bill MiUer, USACE- we were not to be studying anything dealing with Cherry Creek, Weare just observers
<br />in this project. The administration has given the Corps the ability to move some money in the Corps, We need
<br />to go to the appropriations people to get the funds, We are struggling to meet the needs ofthe communities,
<br />This has caused us stress to meet the expectations of our customers, This language is a significant effort; our
<br />help won't come cheap, I will not put a number on this now. He also mentioned that 'For the Record' that the:
<br />"The COE ceased all activities and was made and 'observer' of this entire process by legislation," He went
<br />on to mention the COE went to the NWS for a PMP and that they will have to review the results, Further, this
<br />matter as it applies to the COE may be bigger than an Omaha issue and we may seek guidance from
<br />Washington and a lot has to be worked out. Finally, since activity from the COE has been essentially stopped
<br />that the COE has never put out an official position on this Cherry Creek Study, Bill also noted that in addition
<br />to items related to the difference between the two PMPs' that there are differences in the hydrologic modeling
<br />between the state and the COE which can also lead to substantial differences in the PMF, So this issue is
<br />bigger than just the PMP, Further, any legislation will be done in Washington DC and not at the
<br />10caVregionallevel.
<br />
<br />Jack Byers, SEO - can you give the legislators a capability statement once the question comes up?
<br />
<br />Bill Miller, USACE - Yes,
<br />
<br />Rod Kuharich, CWCB - We aren't here without the local support, In addition, it is important that a critical
<br />maSS of communities be behind the PMP,
<br />
<br />Larry Laug, CWCB - We have contacts to get to the issue,
<br />
<br />Terry Baus (City and County of Denver - We go back twice a year to meet with the delegates; there has
<br />been so much focus on the Corps in this area, We would lobby hard for the Corps to get this solved;" it is a
<br />critical issue",
<br />
<br />Jack Byers, SEO - We need to see ifthere is anyone that has a problem with this moving forward,
<br />
<br />Larry Lang, CWCB - The Corps brought 16 ideas to the table when this problem arose,
<br />
<br />Bill Miller, USACE - The public never heard what our opinion was,
<br />
<br />Jack Byers, SEO - Can we take this to a point to where we review this to the point where the public can have
<br />an input? This study is base data, and we can get the Corps to review this study and then get the public
<br />involved to assess what the Corps has come up with,
<br />
<br />Larry Lang, CWCB - We are going to wait until the technical review is done by the nonfederal entities, We
<br />have a draft report now and can keep in touch with the Corps in the review process, All interested parties
<br />wilI have until May 16th to submit written responses, Due to budgetary constraints, the timing of proceeding
<br />with this process is important. In addition, he will call the various communities to see what action needs to be
<br />taken,
<br />
<br />Jack Byers, SEO - We Can keep a chain on them until the point where we have a public input process to see
<br />how the Corps will move forward, We want to influence this before the alternatives are put into place, The
<br />
<br />Flood Protection. Water Project Planning and Finance. Stream and Lake Protection
<br />Water Supply Protection. Conservation Planning
<br />
|