My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
Water Committee Agenda and Packet 2011 03 04
PORTAL
>
BOARDS COMMISSIONS COMMITTEES RECORDS (20.000)
>
UTILITY COMMITTEE (pka: Water Committee)
>
2006-2019 Water Committee Agendas and Packets
>
2011 Water Committee Agendas and Packets
>
Water Committee Agenda and Packet 2011 03 04
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/11/2021 10:46:50 AM
Creation date
2/24/2011 3:35:40 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
City Council Records
Doc Type
Boards Commissions Committees Records
Supplemental fields
Test
WCPKT 2011 03 04
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
32
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
Tienken <br />Hill <br />Mr. Malcolm Fleming <br />City Manager <br />CITY OF LOUISVILLE <br />749 Main Street <br />Louisville CO 80027 <br />Re: <br />Dear Malcolm, <br />ATTORNEYS James C. Tienken, P.C. <br />AT LAW Alan G. Hill, P.C. <br />February 24, 2011 <br />Application of City of Louisville <br />Case No. 07 CW 310 <br />Transfer of FRICO /Marshall and <br />South Boulder and Coal Creek Shares <br />The City filed a water court application in December, 2007, <br />seeking to incorporate water associated with additional Farmers <br />Reservoir and Irrigation Company "FRICO Marshall shares and <br />South Boulder and Coal Creek Irrigating Ditch Company "SBCC <br />shares into Louisville's system. The application includes <br />shares acquired by the City since the last transfer of Marshall <br />and SBCC was completed in 1995. <br />The case is currently on the referee's docket in the water <br />court, which is more "informal" than the judge's docket. <br />Although .^.e h circulated a det engineering report, and a <br />proposed referee's ruling, to the ten parties who filed <br />statements of opposition in the case, we have not received any <br />comments or feedback from the other parties to the case. <br />Due to the lack of comments from opposing parties, and the <br />lack of effective deadlines on the referee's docket, City staff <br />and I agree that the case should be "re- referred" to the judge's <br />docket. Unless there is substantial movement on the case in the <br />month or so, we will take the steps necessary to have the case <br />placed on the judge's docket. <br />REFEREE'S DOCKET VS. JUDGE'S DOCKET <br />At the time that a water court case is filed, the case is <br />referred to the referee's docket, and a more informal process <br />begins. As indicated, the City has circulated an engineering <br />report and a proposed ruling for consideration by the other <br />parties. Typically, cases that are on the referee's docket have <br />informal negotiations, and referee's status conferences are held <br />Pir In the Historic State Mercantile Building 801 Main Street, Suite 120 Louisville, CO 80027 Phone 303.673.9373 Fax 303.926.0853 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.