Laserfiche WebLink
<br />, <br /> <br />001",38 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />divisive litigation, then it should endorse the principle that <br />negotiated settlements will be treated on a case-by-case basis <br />and will not be viewed as setting precedents for other <br />negotiations. <br /> <br />The Western Governors Association has recognized this to be <br />the case. A pOlicy statement adopted at our meeting this <br />summer. copy attached. notes that we governors: <br /> <br />... recognize the legitimate concerns that <br />people distant from negotiations may feel regarding <br />the implications of provisions in that settlement <br />for other situations. However. each negotiated <br />Indian water rights settlement will be unique. <br />carefully tailored to the parties who are directly <br />affected. and may be totally inappropriate to any <br />and all other situations. Because of overarching <br />historic, moral, and economic imperatives. we urge <br />all concerned parties, especially those in Congress, <br />to treat settlements as case-by-case, exceptional <br />arrangements which could be perceived as possible <br />models for related situations but which are not <br />binding legal precedents. In addition, where <br />significant disputes exist as to application of <br />existing laws or programs within,the context of <br />particular settlements. Congress might consider a <br />clause which expressly reserves the right to dispute <br />these issues as an alternative to withholding <br />consideration or approval. Without such general. <br />flexible approaches, no state will be able to have <br />the disputes within its borders fully resolved. <br /> <br />I urge Congress to adopt this same point of view in actang <br />on S. 1415 and any other settlement legislation which may corne <br />before you. If a case-by-case approach is not taken. all <br />settlements will become hopelessly bogged down in unnecessary <br />fears and the attendant political opposition. Individual <br />treatment of individual settlements is the only chance we have <br />to avoid litigation. <br /> <br />Final Settlement Aqreement <br /> <br />The United States filed applications for reserved water <br />rights for the Tribes in 1976 in Colorado District Court for <br />Water Division No.7. The Colorado court has jurisdiction to <br />adjudicate these claims pursuant to the McCarren Amendment. <br /> <br />It is this litigation which the Agreement will bring to a <br />negotiated settlement. In essence. what the parties have done <br />is agree on the decree which they will ask the Colorado court <br />to enter. which decree will quantify the Tribes' reserved water <br />rights and define the terms and conditions of their use and <br />administration. <br /> <br />-2- <br /> <br />~ <br />