WSP06274 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

. u 00112~ . . priorities based on construction. I. Federal Court Suit II !Q1 ~ East Slope Streams East Slope stream adjudications are to be distinguished from the federal court case. The federal court case will de- termine the water rights of the United States, and hence of the District as its beneficiary from the West Slope works. That proceeding relates only to waters being diverted out of the Colorado River and its tributaries. There are involved in that suit the water rights on that interstate stream which is the subject already of United States Supreme Court litigation between Arizona and California. Colorado River larger claims for priorities will be considered by that court. The federal court proceeding does not involve the app- ropriations of the project from East Slope streams, In the federal court proceeding, there are drawn in the water rights, not of just one water district, but of eleven water districts of the Colorado River and its tributaries. There, also, to be adjudged are the numerous provisions for operation under what is known as Senate Document 80, That 1937 Congressional document was a basis of federal funds to construct the Colorado-Big Thompson works on the Colorado River. These works, from where our water association surveys left off, were constructed under the July 5, 1938 contract voted by the taxpayingnelectors. Therein we contracted to have the government build the works, retain title to all electrical plants and power generated, to retain title as well to all of the works for domestic use and irrigation, until the government shall have been repaid the District's agreed share of the large construction costs. For interpreting Senate Document 80 obligations, as well as relative priorities of appropriation on the COlorado, it was important to all interested in the Conservancy District, -16-