Laserfiche WebLink
<br />G <br /> <br />eventually, evaluation and recommendations. Steps included group design of groundrules, <br />articulation of desired outcomes of the process and each meeting, and the design of timed agendas <br />to achieve those outcomes. <br /> <br />The process was designed to allow all stakeholders to participate fully in the transition from <br />a somewhat adversarial model of interaction to a more problem-defining and sol ving model using <br />collaborative and consensus-based decision-making. At critical junctures, the facilitation and <br />consulting team also provided skill-building interventions in conflict management and collaborative <br />problem solving. The process promoted success of the endeavor by providing an environment <br />within which both substantive disagreements and communication issues could be addressed and <br />resolved. <br /> <br />Substance. An important early step in the group's progress was to identify and achieve <br /> <br />consensus on the priority issues. The group organized substantive issues into four action <br /> <br />categories: <br /> <br />Category I - Critical; necessary to work on now, although ultimate resolution mayor <br />may not be within the purview of GURU II. <br /> <br />Category II - Work on Next;, (although work may already be in progress by some <br />GURU II members or other RIP parties). <br /> <br />Category III - Work on Later; long-term issues not susceptible to immediate resolution <br /> <br /> <br />Category IV - Non-issues; at least at this time. <br /> <br />The group then categorized the issues as follows: <br /> <br />Category I - (a) Uncertainties in Flow Recommendations. <br />(b) CWCB Discretion When No Direct Flow/Population Causal Linkage <br />Can. Be Demonstrated. <br />(c) Interim Instream Flow Rights. <br />(d) Impact of the Legal Protection of the Flows Needed for Recovery on <br />Colorado's Ability to Develop its Compact Apportionments <br />(e) "Sufficient Progress" As Possible Impediment to Protecting Flows. <br />(f) Lack of Grassroots Constituency Support Within Agencies and Among <br />Public. <br /> <br />Category II - (a) Previous CWCB Decisions. <br />(b) "Physically and Legally Available" Requirement. <br /> <br />i j' <br />