Laserfiche WebLink
<br />001374 <br /> <br />. <br /> <br />State of Colorado <br /> <br />COLORADO WATER CONSERVATION BOARD <br /> <br />Denver <br /> <br />September 11, 1939 <br /> <br />G, W, Shute, Esquire <br />Attorney for the Colorado <br />River Connnission of Arizona <br />Phoenix. Arizona <br /> <br />My dear Mr, Shute: <br /> <br />Sinoe aoknowledging receipt of your memorandum covering the <br />proposed Bridge Canyon Projeot in ArizolUl., I have had an opportunity <br />to study the document. <br /> <br />Reviewing the proceedings of the Committee of Fourteen on this <br />subj eot and in acoordance with my recolleotion, there is a matter <br />which to my mind your brief does not fully cover, <br /> <br />F <br />I{ <br /> <br />You state on page 8, as follows: <br /> <br />"****We know of no constitutional limitation on the <br />state's right to contraot, and in this particular she <br />is expressly authorized to file on dam sites by the <br />statute oreating the Colorado River Commission whioh <br />has the power to represent the state by Senate Bill <br />No, 112 not yet published," <br /> <br />You state tho.t Senate Bill No, 112 creating the Colorado River <br />Commission of Arizona has not yet been published.. You further state that <br />the Comnission is expressly authorized by this statute to file on dam .. <br />sites and that the Commission "hasthu 'flower to represent the state", <br /> <br />I should be anxious to see a oopy of this Senate Bill and am won- <br />dering if it would be possible to make one available to me as well as <br />to eaoh of the members of the speoial oOllllllittee appointed from the <br />Committee of Fourteen to handle this matter. <br /> <br />Without; examining the statute I assume there is no question, <br />from your statement, but that this Commission has the power to file <br />on dam sites or to make applioation such as the one under disoussion, <br />but there canes to my mind two other points, namely: <br /> <br />1, Has the application to the Fedoral Power Connnission been <br />amended to 8how the State of Arizona in that matter is now represented <br />by the Colorado River COllllllission? It would appear from your briei' that <br />this Commission has replaoed the State Land C=issioner. As a general <br />propOSition, it would seem that irrespective of such amendment any <br />proceedings under this application would be by.representation of the <br />Colorado River Commiesion oi' Arizona and Whatever authority it has would <br />be binding on the State in all suoh prooeedings, However. it would seem. <br />well ii' the applioation were so amended to show the substitution of the <br />C=*-ssion as applioant :In plaoe of the State Land Commission., It is <br />Poss:i.ble that this has already been done, <br />