Laserfiche WebLink
<br />There \oVas some discussion as to the use of "deposif' versus "listing", and the confusion that it <br />was creating. The consensus seemed to be to use "listing". <br /> <br />Ed McCarthy indicated that the bank should avoid certifying anything, let the depositor certify <br />applicable conditions: that the ground water is or is not in a District, what formations are involved, <br />District rules on withdrawals, that the water right is owned or granted by permit, and a cop.; of <br />a deed showing that the water has not been severed from the property. He also indicated that <br />basic problems exist with trying to 6'"'!'*iS the value of certain rights, and the bank should stay <br />out of that. <br /> <br />It was also indicated that the more cumbersome the rules become, the less likely people would <br />participate in the bank. <br /> <br />Representative Jones asked if the Board had the authority to set time linlts of less than 10 years <br />on the deposits. The answer was it was not prohibited, but no one had asked about that, yet. <br />Also he pointed out that in the long term that the Board could wor1< with other States to try to finn <br />up transfers of water. <br /> <br />Chairman Counts summarized that population groMh in Texas is a time bon-b. Need Trans <br />Texas and other mechanisms to assure future flexibility to find new supplies. Indicated that <br />former Speaker Oayton may have had prophetic visicin on what will be I"'(:l3Ssary to meet State's . <br />needs. <br /> <br />A final question from John Wiliams, does ground water fall under the ca..titutiona/ prohibition <br />of using State I'TlOI'le'/ to transfer waters from basin to basin? <br /> <br />6 <br />