Laserfiche WebLink
<br />Mr. Jim Lochhead <br />Page J <br />December 6, 1996 <br /> <br />3372 <br /> <br />results, the regional entities would have to decide if they wished to pursue their <br />proposal with Denver. Cooperative action proposals from those regions wanting <br />to continue with the process would then be submitted to the Board for <br />consideration. <br /> <br />The above approach should help all involved to better understand Denver's role in <br />solving metro area water needs. We know that Denver's resources are not sufficient to <br />meet its water needs and also meet all the water needs of entities outside the CSA. There <br />will be shortages that will have to be made up in ways that do not include Denver. That <br />is why Denver cannot and will not negotiate with an individual entity or region without <br />first completing the collective analysis outlined in Phase 2. For us to do otherwise would <br />risk the claim of favoritism in selecting one region's or individual's cooperative action <br />proposal over another region's proposal. <br /> <br />I hope these observations help clarify how Denver views its role in exploring cooperative <br />action proposals. Unfortunately, I was not able to attend the December J meeting with <br />the Northwest metro water interests nor will I be able to attend the December 6 meeting <br />, <br />of the South metro water interests. Therefore, would you please have Doug Robotham <br />share this letter with the participants at those meetings. Thank you, <br /> <br />Sincerely, <br /> <br />t~ <br /> <br />H. J. Barry <br />Manager <br /> <br />n:\Linle\DR_ coact.doc <br />