My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
City Council Minutes 1982 07 20
PORTAL
>
CITY COUNCIL RECORDS
>
MINUTES (45.090)
>
1970-1999 City Council Minutes
>
1982 City Council Minutes
>
City Council Minutes 1982 07 20
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 2:31:19 PM
Creation date
7/8/2009 4:00:30 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
City Council Minutes
Signed Date
7/20/1982
Original Hardcopy Storage
7C3
Supplemental fields
Test
CCMIN 1982 07 20
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
20
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
<br />7/20/82 <br /> <br />Page -13- <br /> <br />proposed. It was Mr. Hobbs' recommendation <br />that the City keep an open door on the pro- <br />posal. <br /> <br />Mayor Meier <br /> <br />Inquired if it would be Mr. Hobbs' recom- <br />mendation and to the City's benefit to <br />formally write the Denver Water Board a <br />letter stating our interest in the project <br />but need more time to review the proposal. <br />Hobbs advised it was his feeling this would <br />be the way to proceed at this time. <br />Mayor Meier also suggested that perhaps the <br />date of July 20th be extended so that the <br />City has an opportunity to be represented <br />as a member. <br /> <br />Councilman Leary <br /> <br />Inquired if Mr. Hobbs was suggesting that <br />the City wait until December 7, 1982 before <br />making a commitment on the EIS study at this <br />time. <br />Hobbs replied - no, it was his suggestion <br />that the City tell Denver they have an in- <br />terest but did not sign the agreement - list <br />our concerns stating we would like to work <br />these out prior to signing the agreement <br />and would like to meet with them. He would <br />also suggest that September 7, 1982 be the <br />absolute deadline. It was his opinion that <br />Denver would not get 60% participation by <br />tomorrow. Further suggested that City <br />write a letter stating they are interested, <br />would like to participate ~ of 1%, and <br />here are some of our concerns. <br /> <br />Councilman Leary <br /> <br />Wanted clarification on the construction <br />costs relating to Gross Reservoir did it <br />mean that the costs of the existing facility <br />would have to be picked up by the City, as <br />well as any new construction? <br />Hobbs advised that by expanding the system <br />at present they may be able to better utilize <br />their existing facilities i.e. if Gross <br />Reservoir were expanded more water could be <br />taken there from i.e. the Williams Fork <br />Reservoir, the participant would get a por- <br />tion of that additional water. He further <br />stated all the costs are related to construc- <br />tion not water rights at all, but rather on <br />a lease use. An automatic 5% will go to the <br />Denver Trust Fund which is not included in <br />the costs discussed, as a surcharge. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.