DWR_4437479

• Board or Commission: Colorado Ground Water Commission
• Document Type - Board and Commission Meetings: Meeting Document
• Document Date: 11/15/2024
• Subject: Meeting Minutes

Ground Water Commission Meeting Minutes Page 20
November 15, 2024
include accurate information that addresses one of the four elements that the
Hearing Officer is empowered to consider as part of an objection. If a protest doesn't
address one of the four elements, the objection is rejected by the Commission.
Ms. Mele asked Mr. Curtis if the proposal would require the Hearing Officer,
Commission, or Staff to reject the proposal.
Mr. Curtis clarified that he does not have a preference for who would review the
objection and reject the proposal. A hearing would not be held if a factual dispute
related to one of the four elements outlined in the rules is not present.
Commissioner Noble suggested a requirement for objections to include an affidavit
stating material facts must support the protestors objection.
Mr. Curtis agreed with Commissioner Noble's suggestion.
Mr. Ullmann commented that the review of objections before they go to hearing
should be done by the Hearing Officer, and not Staff.
Ms. Mele asked if a proposed rule should only apply to Southern High Plains, or in all
of the Designated Basins.
Commissioner Hume commented that Commission Staff routinely makes decisions
regarding permit applications that are returned to the Applicant. In his view, Staff
would be able to make the determination if the objection does not meet the
requirements laid out in the rules.
Mr. Andy Jones then addressed the Commission and provided comments related to
agenda item no. 11 b, Newspaper for publications of legal notices in Prowers County.
Mr. Jones asked if the Commission would be agreeable to Mr. Jones discussing the
issue from this agenda item at a Supreme Court Committee meeting.
Commissioner Pautler and Commissioner Diaz responded that this agenda item will be
a recurring problem, and they are agreeable to updating legislation to reflect the
current times.
Commissioner Denning responded that it would also be possible for the State, CWCB,
Districts, etc. to provide notice of applications on their respective websites.
Chairman Arnusch also commented that challenges will come with respect to
interested parties that may not have internet access, while other traditional methods
of providing notification are simultaneously becoming less common. Chairman Arnusch
also provided support for Mr. jones efforts.
Commissioner Pautler asked Mr. Jones if counties across the State would be included
in the dialogue.