DWR_3364084

• Board or Commission: Colorado Ground Water Commission
• Document Type - Board and Commission Meetings: Meeting Document
• Document Date: 5/18/2017
• Subject: MEETING MATERIALS

from the Commission that the original permit issued for the subject well in 1960 is the final permit and therefore the requirements of § 37-90-107, i.e. issuance of a final permit based
on actual beneficial use of the well, do not apply. Staff argued in its response that all wells, including the subject well, are subject to diversion limits based on actual beneficial
use. The Hearing Officer denied the applicant’s motion. <Staff and Strasburg reached a settlement, agreeing that the maximum amount of water Strasburg put to beneficial use was 15.4
acre feet, but reserving Strasburg’s right to appeal the denial of its Motion for Summary Judgment. Strasburg likely will appeal after the hearing is resolved in the factually similar
case of Town of Kiowa, 16GW02.
KIOWA WATER & WASTEWATER AUTHORITY Case No. 16-GW-2
Designated Basin: Kiowa Bijou
Management District: North Kiowa Bijou
Attorney: Michael Toll
Subject: Objection by the applicant to the requirement that the well be subject to final permitting requirements and to the reduction of the annual appropriation upon issuance of the
final permit for the well with permit no. 2794-F. <
Status: This matter in conjunction with the Strasburg Sanitation & Water District, case no. 16GW1, is set for a four day hearing scheduled to begin on May 22-25, 2017. The hearings
are set back-to-back so that the hearing in this case will begin after the hearing in 16GW1 ends. The applicant filed a motion for summary judgment on August 23, 2016, seeking a determination
from the Commission that the original permit issued for the subject well in 1960 is the final permit and therefor the requirements of § 37-90-107, i.e. issuance of a final permit based
on actual beneficial use of the well, do not apply. Staff argued in its response that all wells, including the subject well, are subject to diversion limits based on actual beneficial
use. The Hearing Officer denied the applicant’s motion and because the applicant indicated it intended to offer evidence at trial as to intended future use of the well, on February
3, 2017 Staff filed a motion for summary judgment arguing that evidence considered by the Commission must be limited to evidence of the extent of actual beneficial use of the water
and that evidence of future projected water demand is not relevant for the purpose of issuance of the final permit. The Hearing Officer denied Staff’s Motion, holding that the great
and growing cities doctrine applies to Kiowa’s final permit, and that the hearing should proceed to hear evidence of Kiowa’s future projected water use.<
Meridian Service Metropolitan District Case No. 16-GW-05
Designated Basin: Upper Black Squirrel
Management District: Upper Black Squirrel
Attorney: Michael Toll
Subject: Petition for determination of jurisdiction pertaining to surface water in Pond B and Pond C. < <
Status: This matter was filed on December 16, 2016 and no deadlines have been set. Upper Black Squirrel Creek GWMD and Booker Trusts are the only parties that have expressed interest
in being parties, and Booker Trusts only to monitor the case. The Staff is meeting informally with Upper Black Squirrel Creek GWMD and Meridian on May 15 to attempt to resolve all
issues.
HUTTON EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION V. WOLFE, ETAL Case No. 15CW3018
Designated Basin: Northern High Plains
Management District:
Attorney: Chad Wallace, Pat Kowaleski
Subject: Lawsuit filed by the Hutton Educational Foundation in an effort to make the State Engineer administer designated ground water rights and surface rights together for the purpose
of compact compliance under the Republican River Compact. Complaint also alleges that SB-52, which revised 37-90-106 to limit how designated basin boundaries may be modified, and the
Colorado Groundwater Management Act of 1965, are unconstitutional. The Ground Water Commission filed a Motion to Intervene and an Answer to the Hutton Complaint on December 16, 2015
and such Motion was granted on January 18, 2016.
Status: The Commission filed a motion to dismiss the second and third claims in which Hutton asserted that the Management Act and SB-52, amending the Act, were unconstitutional. The
water court agreed and dismissed the second claim and part of the third claim. The water court held that it does not have jurisdiction over designated ground water and that the Commission
must first determine whether designated ground water is implicated, and therefore the issue was not ripe. Hutton sought certification of the dismissal for appeal to the Colorado Supreme
Court. The trial court certified its order of dismissal for appeal and stayed the remaining claims until the appeal is resolved. Hutton has identified the issues for appeal to include
the trial court’s dismissal and the underlying question of whether SB 10-52, amending the Management Act, is unconstitutional. Some of the defendants, joined by the Commission, filed
a motion with the Supreme Court to limit the issues on appeal to the dismissal, and to exclude any arguments on the constitutionality of Management Act statutes. The Supreme Court
granted the motion to limit the appeal to the water court’s dismissal. Hutton has filed its opening brief and the Commission filed the answer brief on Monday, May 1st. <
7
6
AG Report2017-5-18.pdfATTORNEY GENERAL’S REPORT
ATTORNEY GENERAL’S REPORT Cases involving the Colorado Ground Water Commission May 18, 2017 The listing below summarizes matters in which the Office of the Attorney General represents
the Colorado Ground Water Commission as of May 3, 2017. CHEROKEE METROPOLITAN DISTRICT Case No. 08-GW-71 13SA330 Designated Basin: Upper Black Squirrel Creek Management
District: Upper Black Squirrel Creek Before: Jody Grantham, Hearing Officer Attorney: Michael Toll Subject: An application for approval of a replacement plan to make new appropriations
from the alluvial aquifer within the basin. Objections were submitted by the District, along with four other water users in the basin. A hearing was held for two weeks in Denver beginning
on June 8, 2009 during which the applicants completed their initial presentation and the objectors began their presentations. An additional week of hearing scheduled for August 3
through 7, 2009 was vacated following a ruling from the Division 2 Water Court regarding Cherokee’s use of some of its wells, subject to further negotiations and amendment of the proposed
replacement plan. This case was consolidated with change cases 08GW78 and 09GW15, and the trial was set to continue in January 2010. Status: In November of 2009, the Upper Black
Squirrel Creek Ground Water Management District filed in district court, in Case No. 98CW80, for a declaratory judgment asking the court to determine whether under a 1999 Stipulation
Cherokee is required to use its waste water as recharge for the basin or if that waste water can be claimed as replacement credit under a replacement plan. On June 17, 2013 the Court
found that neither Cherokee nor Meridian is prohibited from claiming wastewater return credits for its replacement plan. UBS filed an appeal on December 18, 2013. The Supreme Court
has issued a decision in which they said they upheld the decision of the District Court under the 1999 Stipulation, but included in the decision ambiguous language as to whether or
not Cherokee can use effluent as a source of replacement water in a replacement plan. Staff has not heard from Cherokee as to how they plan to proceed with the application still pending
before the Hearing Officer. CHEROKEE METROPOLITAN DISTRICT Case No. 08-GW-78 09-GW-15 Designated Basin: Upper Black Squirrel Creek Management District: Upper Black
Squirrel Creek Before: Jody Grantham, Hearing Officer 2 Attorney: Michael Toll Subject: Applications to change the type and place of use of wells. Objections were submitted by
the District and other water users in the basin. Both cases were consolidated with 08GW71. Status: See above. MERIDIAN SERVICE METRO DISTRICT Case No. 09-GW-11 Designated Basin:
Upper Black Squirrel Management District: Upper Black Squirrel Before: Jody Grantham, Hearing Officer Attorney: Michael Toll Subject: Application for a change of water right.
Two parties filed objections. Status: The hearing set for February 25 and 26, 2010 has been stayed because the water rights to be changed were for use in the replacement plan in
08GW71. The matter is stayed pending resolution of the issues in Case No. 98CW80 as described above for Cherokee Metro District’s replacement plan. GALLEGOS, REINALDO, ET AL Case
No. 03-GW-06 03CV1335 15SA118 Designated Basin: Upper Crow Creek Management District: Before: Supreme Court Attorney: Pat Kowaleski Subject:
Petition to de-designate portions of the Upper Crow Creek Designated Ground Water Basin. Background: The petitioners originally sent letters to the State Engineer in 2002 and 2003
seeking curtailment of wells within the Basin. The State Engineer declined to curtail wells and the petitioners appealed the issue of the Commission’s jurisdiction over surface water
rights first to District Court and eventually to the Supreme Court. The Supreme Court held that the Commission has jurisdiction over surface water rights only to the extent the holder
of surface rights seeks to change a boundary of a designated basin, in which case the surface rights owner must show, using information that was not before the Commission at the time
of designation, that pumping of the designated ground water has more than a de minimis effect on the surface rights and is causing injury to those rights. The matter was remanded to
the Commission, and this petition to de-designation a portion of the designated basin was filed with the Commission on August 11, 2010. Status: A 7 ½ day trial was held in February
2014, and on March 9, 2015 the district court issued its decision denying the Gallegos Family’s petition to de-designate a portion of the basin. On April 27, 2015 the Gallegos Family
filed an appeal of that order to the Supreme Court. Oral Argument was held on December 6, 2016, and the parties await a ruling. 3 FRONT RANGE RESOURCES Case No. 13-GW-7
15CV30493 Designated Basin: Lost Creek 16SA243
Management District: Lost Creek Attorney: Michael Toll & Pat Kowaleski Subject: Front Range Resources filed for a replacement plan. Objections were filed by Equus Farms Inc., Lost
Creek Land and Cattle Company, the Lost Creek Ground Water Management District and Staff. Status: The matter was dismissed by the Commission and appealed to the District Court where
it was set for trial June 6-16, 2016. Defendants, including the Commission, filed a motion dismiss the application on the grounds that it is speculative because there are no binding
contracts with actual end users for the water. On May 26, 2016 the Court ruled that Front Range Resources was seeking to appropriate and change water rights and that the anti-speculation
doctrine does apply to the application. The Court further found that Front Range Resources’ existing contracts were not binding and do not constitute obligations to provide water,
and that the proposed replacement plan did not detail how or if water would be used on land owned by Front Range Resources. Front Range Resources filed a notice of appeal with the
Supreme Court on September 2, 2016, on the issue of speculation and whether the District Court erred in determining the Designated Ground Water Rules require that water rights be legally
available for use in replacement plans in order to be included in replacement plan application. On September 19, 2016 Lost Creek Land and Cattle, Equus Farms and the Lost Creek Ground
Water Management District filed a notice of cross appeal. Opening Briefs on the appeal were due Friday, February 3, 2017. The Ground Water Commission decided to not file an Answer
Brief. MERIDIAN SERVICE METRO. DIST. Case No. 14-GW-2 Designated Basin: Upper Black Squirrel Management District: Upper Black Squirrel Attorney: Jen Mele Subject: Applicants
filed an application for six new wells, which are French drains that were discussed in Case No. 12-GW-10. Objections were filed by Staff, Farmers and Upper Black Squirrel Ground Water
Management Dist. Status: The matter was dismissed by the Hearing Officer after the applicant presented its case at the hearing that began on January 14, 2015 because the applicant
did not have a replacement plan for its new appropriations. See below Case No. 15GW14. 4 AXTON (Rocky Mountain Roosters) Case No. 15-GW-5 Case No. 15-GW-6 Designated
Basin: Kiowa Bijou Management District: North Kiowa Bijou Attorney: Jen Mele and Philip Lopez Subject: Applicants filed an application for determination of water rights and a
replacement plan. Objections were filed by the North Kiowa Bijou Ground Water Management District, and Earnest Mikita, Robert Alexander, Joe Eurich, Vincent & Jacqueline Eurich, Harold
Eurich, Alvin Eurich, Darrel & Carol Dutro, Bob Pemberton and E. Scott Mikita (collectively, “Individual opposers”). Status: This matter has been set for a five day hearing
scheduled to begin on June 5, 2017. Applicant recently entered into a stipulation with Individual opposers. Settlement discussions are continuing with the North Kiowa Bijou Ground
Water Management District. Staff did not file a statement of opposition in these cases. MERIDIAN METRO DISTRICT Case No. 15-GW-14 Designated Basin: Upper Black Squirrel
Management District: Upper Black Squirrel Attorney: Jen Mele Subject: Application for replacement plan to replace depletions of underdrains that were the subject of 14GW02. Objections
were filed by Pain Brush Hills Metro District, Upper Black Squirrel Creek Ground Water Management District, Woodmen Hills Metro District, the Wayne E. Booker Revocable Living Trust
and the Frances G. Booker Revocable Living Trust, Dan Farmer, Joe Farmer, Jr., Jerry Farmer, Teresa Farmer, Edna Farmer and the Farmer Pipeline Company, LLC, and Staff of the Ground
Water Commission. Status: A five day hearing was held in February 2017 and parties are now negotiating the manner in which to calculate evapotranspiration arising from use of the
recharge structures. CHEROKEE METRO DIST v. GROUND Case No. 15CW3028 WATER COMMISSION and UPPER BLACK 15GW15 SQUIRREL CREEK GROUND WATER MANAGEMENT
DIST Designated Basin: Upper Black Squirrel Creek Management District: Upper Black Squirrel Creek Attorney: Jen Mele Subject: Cherokee Metropolitan District originally filed
a Complaint for Declaratory Judgment in district court seeking a determination as to the legal uses of Cherokee Well Nos. 1-8, 5 specifically a finding that those wells can legally
be used both inside and outside the designated basin and that irrigation use is not limited to the acreage that was specified in the statement of claim filed with the original application.
Defendants filed a Motion to Dismiss, arguing that the Ground Water Commission has jurisdiction over this determination since the subject rights are designated ground water. The motion
was granted and Cherokee has submitted the Complaint for Declaratory Judgment to the Hearing Officer. Status: The matter was set for a 5 day hearing scheduled to begin on March
30, 2017. On January 9, 2017, both Cherokee and the Upper Black Squirrel Creek Ground Water Management District filed motions for summary judgment asking the Hearing Officer to decide
the main controversy in the case, the proper place of use of Cherokee Well Nos. 1-8. The parties requested and received a stay in the proceedings to allow time to negotiate a resolution.
Settlement negotiations between the parties are ongoing. WOODMEN HILLS METRO DIST. Case No. 03-GW-20 Designated Basin: Upper Black Squirrel Management District: Upper
Black Squirrel Attorney: Philip Lopez Subject: Application for a replacement plan for depletions resulting from the pumping of 16 wells. Objections were filed by the Upper Black
Squirrel Creek Ground Water Management District, Wayne E. Booker Revocable Living Trust and the Frances G. Booker Revocable Living Trust, Dan Farmer, Joe Farmer, Jr., Jerry Farmer,
Teresa Farmer, Edna Farmer and the Farmer Family Pipeline Company and Staff. This application is technically a republication required by the hearing officer in 2005 to include additional
structures to the replacement plan filed in 2003 and therefore the original case number was used. Status: The applicant filed a motion to postpone the hearing that was set for
October 31, 2016 in order to include additional structures causing depletions and the concept of using recharge facilities in its replacement plan. A five day hearing is set for December
4, 2017. Applicant’s 26(a)(2) expert disclosures are due May 17, 2017, and opposers 26(a)(2) expert disclosures are due August 14, 2017. STRASBURG SANITATION & WATER DISTRICT
Case No. 16-GW-1 Designated Basin: Kiowa Bijou Management District: North Kiowa Bijou Attorney: Michael Toll Subject: Objection by the applicant to the requirement that the well
be subject to final permitting requirements and to the reduction of the annual appropriation upon issuance of the final permit for the well with permit no. 2642-F. 6 Status:
This matter in conjunction with the Kiowa Water & Wastewater Authority, case no. 16GW2, is set for a four day hearing scheduled to begin on May 22 – 25, 2017. The hearings are set
back-to-back so that the hearing in 16GW2 will begin when the hearing in this case ends. The applicant filed a motion for summary judgment on August 23, 2016, seeking a determination
from the Commission that the original permit issued for the subject well in 1960 is the final permit and therefore the requirements of § 37-90-107, i.e. issuance of a final permit based
on actual beneficial use of the well, do not apply. Staff argued in its response that all wells, including the subject well, are subject to diversion limits based on actual beneficial
use. The Hearing Officer denied the applicant’s motion. Staff and Strasburg reached a settlement, agreeing that the maximum amount of water Strasburg put to beneficial use was 15.4
acre feet, but reserving Strasburg’s right to appeal the denial of its Motion for Summary Judgment. Strasburg likely will appeal after the hearing is resolved in the factually similar
case of Town of Kiowa, 16GW02. KIOWA WATER & WASTEWATER AUTHORITY Case No. 16-GW-2 Designated Basin: Kiowa Bijou Management District: North Kiowa Bijou Attorney: Michael Toll
Subject: Objection by the applicant to the requirement that the well be subject to final permitting requirements and to the reduction of the annual appropriation upon issuance of
the final permit for the well with permit no. 2794-F. Status: This matter in conjunction with the Strasburg Sanitation & Water District, case no. 16GW1, is set for a four day
hearing scheduled to begin on May 22-25, 2017. The hearings are set back-to-back so that the hearing in this case will begin after the hearing in 16GW1 ends. The applicant filed a
motion for summary judgment on August 23, 2016, seeking a determination from the Commission that the original permit issued for the subject well in 1960 is the final permit and therefor
the requirements of § 37-90-107, i.e. issuance of a final permit based on actual beneficial use of the well, do not apply. Staff argued in its response that all wells, including the
subject well, are subject to diversion limits based on actual beneficial use. The Hearing Officer denied the applicant’s motion and because the applicant indicated it intended to offer
evidence at trial as to intended future use of the well, on February 3, 2017 Staff filed a motion for summary judgment arguing that evidence considered by the Commission must be limited
to evidence of the extent of actual beneficial use of the water and that evidence of future projected water demand is not relevant for the purpose of issuance of the final permit.
The Hearing Officer denied Staff’s Motion, holding that the great and growing cities doctrine applies to Kiowa’s final permit, and that the hearing should proceed to hear evidence of
Kiowa’s future projected water use. Meridian Service Metropolitan District Case No. 16-GW-05 Designated Basin: Upper Black Squirrel Management District: Upper Black Squirrel
7 Attorney: Michael Toll Subject: Petition for determination of jurisdiction pertaining to surface water in Pond B and Pond C. Status: This matter was filed on December
16, 2016 and no deadlines have been set. Upper Black Squirrel Creek GWMD and Booker Trusts are the only parties that have expressed interest in being parties, and Booker Trusts only
to monitor the case. The Staff is meeting informally with Upper Black Squirrel Creek GWMD and Meridian on May 15 to attempt to resolve all issues. HUTTON EDUCATIONAL FOUNDATION
V. WOLFE, ETAL Case No. 15CW3018 Designated Basin: Northern High Plains Management District: Attorney: Chad Wallace, Pat Kowaleski Subject: Lawsuit filed by the Hutton Educational
Foundation in an effort to make the State Engineer administer designated ground water rights and surface rights together for the purpose of compact compliance under the Republican River
Compact. Complaint also alleges that SB-52, which revised 37-90-106 to limit how designated basin boundaries may be modified, and the Colorado Groundwater Management Act of 1965, are
unconstitutional. The Ground Water Commission filed a Motion to Intervene and an Answer to the Hutton Complaint on December 16, 2015 and such Motion was granted on January 18, 2016.
Status: The Commission filed a motion to dismiss the second and third claims in which Hutton asserted that the Management Act and SB-52, amending the Act, were unconstitutional.
The water court agreed and dismissed the second claim and part of the third claim. The water court held that it does not have jurisdiction over designated ground water and that the
Commission must first determine whether designated ground water is implicated, and therefore the issue was not ripe. Hutton sought certification of the dismissal for appeal to the
Colorado Supreme Court. The trial court certified its order of dismissal for appeal and stayed the remaining claims until the appeal is resolved. Hutton has identified the issues
for appeal to include the trial court’s dismissal and the underlying question of whether SB 10-52, amending the Management Act, is unconstitutional. Some of the defendants, joined
by the Commission, filed a motion with the Supreme Court to limit the issues on appeal to the dismissal, and to exclude any arguments on the constitutionality of Management Act statutes.
The Supreme Court granted the motion to limit the appeal to the water court’s dismissal. Hutton has filed its opening brief and the Commission filed the answer brief on Monday, May
1st.
Agenda2017May.docxNOTICE OF GENERAL MEETING OF THE

NOTICE OF GENERAL MEETING OF THE
COLORADO GROUND WATER COMMISSION
10:00 a.m., Thursday, May 18, 2017
1313 Sherman St. Rm. 318
Denver, CO 80203
A G E N D A
Determine quorum
Review and approval of agenda items
Approval of Minutes for Meeting of February 17, 2017
Report of the Executive Director by State Engineer Dick Wolfe
Commissioners’ Reports
Staff Report by Keith Vander Horst.
Report of the Attorney General by Philip Lopez and Michael Toll. This is a background briefing on legal issues in the written report.< The Board may refer any item< contained or discussed
under this topic to Agenda Item No. 12 for discussion in Executive Session.
District Reports:
Marks Butte, Frenchman, Sand Hills and Central Yuma GWMDs by Nate Midcap
W-Y GWMD by Bryon Mc Call
Arikaree GWMD by Rod Mason
Plains GWMD by Brandi Baquera
East Cheyenne GWMD by Carolyn Talbert
Southern High Plains GWMD by Blake Gourley
North KiowaBijou GWMD by Robert Loose
Upper Black Squirrel Creek GWMD by Tracy Doran
Upper Big Sandy GWMD by Tracy Doran
Lost Creek GWMD by Thomas Sauter
Upper Crow Creek Basin by Dan Loyd
Republican River Water Conservation District by Deb Daniel
Old Business
Status on joint proposal regarding the “Petition For Determination of Jurisdiction Over Surface Water Within the Upper Black Squirrel Creek Designated Ground Water Basin”, from Meridian
Service Metropolitan District
Status of stakeholder process on proposal to amend Rule 5.6 regarding replacement plans, and Rule 5.8 regarding artificial recharge, storage, and recovery plans
Status of proposed amendments to 2 CCR 402-3, Rules of Procedure for All Hearings Before the Colorado Ground Water Commission
New Business
Introductory discussion on Commission’s involvement with conservation measures, by Commissioner Farmer
Proposal to initiate a change to Rule 7.4 to require a historical withdrawal and depletion analysis for a change of description of irrigated acres, by Staff
Selection of August Meeting location
Public Comments
Executive Session (if needed)
Adjournment</
During Lunch: Workshop for Commission Members - overview of Designated Basins

NOTICE OF GENERAL MEETING OF THE
COLORADO GROUND WATER COMMISSION
May 18, 2017
Agenda2017May.pdfNOTICE OF GENERAL MEETING OF THE
1. Determine quorum 2. Review and approval of agenda items 3. Approval of Minutes for Meeting of February 17, 2017 4. Report of the Executive Director by State Engineer
Dick Wolfe 5. Commissioners’ Reports 6. Staff Report by Keith Vander Horst. 7. Report of the Attorney General by Philip Lopez and Michael Toll. This is a background briefing on
legal issues in the written report. The Board may refer any item contained or discussed under this topic to Agenda Item No. 12 for discussion in Executive Session. 8. District Reports:
a. Marks Butte, Frenchman, Sand Hills and Central Yuma GWMDs by Nate Midcap b. W-Y GWMD by Bryon Mc Call c. Arikaree GWMD by Rod Mason d. Plains GWMD by Brandi Baquera e. East Cheyenne
GWMD by Carolyn Talbert f. Southern High Plains GWMD by Blake Gourley g. North Kiowa-Bijou GWMD by Robert Loose h. Upper Black Squirrel Creek GWMD by Tracy Doran i. Upper Big Sandy
GWMD by Tracy Doran j. Lost Creek GWMD by Thomas Sauter k. Upper Crow Creek Basin by Dan Loyd l. Republican River Water Conservation District by Deb Daniel 9. Old Business a. Status
on joint proposal regarding the “Petition For Determination of Jurisdiction Over Surface Water Within the Upper Black Squirrel Creek Designated Ground Water Basin”, from Meridian Service
Metropolitan District b. Status of stakeholder process on proposal to amend Rule 5.6 regarding replacement plans, and Rule 5.8 regarding artificial recharge, storage, and recovery plans
c. Status of proposed amendments to 2 CCR 402-3, Rules of Procedure for All Hearings Before the Colorado Ground Water Commission NOTICE OF GENERAL MEETING OF THE COLORADO GROUND WATER
COMMISSION 10:00 a.m., Thursday, May 18, 2017 1313 Sherman St. Rm. 318 Denver, CO 80203 A G E N D A NOTICE OF GENERAL MEETING OF THE COLORADO GROUND WATER COMMISSION May 18, 2017
A G E N D A (cont.) 10. New Business a. Introductory discussion on Commission’s involvement with conservation measures, by Commissioner Farmer b. Proposal to initiate a change
to Rule 7.4 to require a historical withdrawal and depletion analysis for a change of description of irrigated acres, by Staff c. Selection of August Meeting location 11. Public Comments
12. Executive Session (if needed) 13. Adjournment During Lunch: Workshop for Commission Members - overview of Designated Basins
Agenda2017May_Draft.docxNOTICE OF GENERAL MEETING OF THE

NOTICE OF GENERAL MEETING OF THE
COLORADO GROUND WATER COMMISSION
10:00 a.m., Thursday, May 18, 2017
1313 Sherman St. Rm. 318
Denver, CO 80203
A G E N D A - Draft
Determine quorum
Review and approval of agenda items
Approval of Minutes for Meeting of February 17, 2017
Report of the Executive Director by State Engineer Dick Wolfe
Commissioners’ Reports
Staff Report by Keith Vander Horst.
Report of the Attorney General by Jennifer Mele. This is a background briefing on legal issues in the written report.< The Board may refer any item< contained or discussed under this