HomeMy WebLinkAbout1981-04-14 Town Council MinutesVAIL TOWN COUNCIL
Work Session
Tuesday, April 14, 1981
2:00 p.m.
Caplan: As Council, I think, if well aware, there are a great number
of water issues that are all coming to a head, including the development
of additional reservoir storage in the immediate Gore Valley, including
this summer the Lionsridge area will have a new water tank, we are
working with our water authority to develop what other reservoirs may
or may not be needed and some of those do and don't relate to the
possible Eagle -Piney project and then the most significant potential
reservoir in the County is the proposed Edwards Reservoir. A couple
of weeks ago when Keith Trgxxel was here we talked about the Town
Council taking a position to support the locals within the County
develop that facility. I know the county commissioners discussed
it a week or two ago and felt that the River Conservvancy District
should take the lead role in that. We have not taken any position
and we are obviously very concerned about the possible development
of that in terms of the good it can potentially offer and potentially
the problems that it may create in terms of how the water is used and
who makes the decisions in terms of how it is used. So we held off
taking any position and thought it would be wise to invite Rawley
and yourself up to educate us a little more about the proposed
project and give us the best thinking from the River District and
the County Commissioners in terms of the alternatives as you see
them.
Grant: Well, first of all, I'd like to explain a little about the
County policy. We've always been developing all the water that we
can in Eagle County, but not the County as the developing agent.
We have enough problems and lack of money without trying to do
everyday business. The River District has been the one that looks
after our water. On that River District John Benton was prior to me
and Japk Olson was prior to John Benton and as we get into the River
District and learn more about it, we know that that's the entity with
which we have to go to to handle our water problems. They have a staff
of attorneys and engineers on constrantly with which each one of us are
paying 37 hundredths of a mill into that district to keep it going.
Since I've been in the District I've felt that they're doing a very
good job, much better than Eagle County could. We want you to know that
we're not against development of water in Eagle County. I'm carrying
this word from Danny also - he couldn't be here today. But the word's
got around that we seem to be arguing against development of water in
Eagle County and that is not so. We've been fighting very hard, I think
Rawley can verify my stand in the River District on trying to develop
water but we're talking about Western Slope water entirely. I wasn't
too happy with your stand on the Ruedi Reservoir because I've followed
that since I was a kid. Just to give you an example, years ago when
that was first being talked about, money was pretty hard to come by.
I was taking $35 a year and that was equal to $3500 right no* to me
and putting it into fighting that Frying Pan Arkansas Project. It
done us no good but we did get Reudi Reservoir out of it. So there's
alot of history behind Reudi Reservior which is going to take too long
to go into right now, but I do wish that you would look into Reudi
a little more than what's been done so far.
Benedict: What is the problem? Where are we in conflict?
Grant: With Aspen.
Slifer: What, do you not want to see the hydro -electric development?
Grant: No, we're not talking about hydro -electric. We're talking about
the water in Reudi - keeping it full when it's Western Slope water.
Wilto: You're saying it should be used by all of Western Slope and not
just Aspen?
Page 2
Grant: Aspen would like to keep it completely full for their yacht
• club.
Wilto: My understanding is, or at least the presentation we heard
was that it was not a matter of keeping it full, but keeping it full
to the level designated by Fish and Game to preserve the fish and the
wildlife.
Grant: There's a certain amount of water that's going to stay in
Reudi and there's a lot of problems - Rawley might go into that.just
a little, the River District does have mostly control over the water
that's in Reudi or somewhat anyway. From there I'm going to turn it
over to Rawley, I just want you gentlemen to understand that as far
as Danny and I are concerned, we're for keeping all the water and
building all the reservoirs in Eagle County that money can, but the
County is not in the position to do it.
Rawley: I think that the following remarks that Dale made, let me
perhaps ramble a little, to give you an idea of what the Colorado
River Water Conservation District is,.what it does and what we think
we can do. The River District is the primary Western Colorado water
policy, and includes the area that we all see on the blue shaded map
and our responsibilities are to benefically use the waters of the
Colorado River to which Colorado is entitled under the 1922 Compact.
It includes the amp of the white to the main stand, the Gunnison,
the PC to the big and little Delores. As such, we've been probably
the forefront organization on litigating the question and opposing
a transmountain diversion. We spent a lot of time and a lot of money
litigating against transmountain diversions. And when it comes down
to it, Colorado's constitution is very clear on the point and has
been supported by statutes and case law, and perhaps most significantly,
the politics of water in Colorado, but water in the State of Colorado
can be used any place in the State of Colorado, hence the Transmountain
diversion question. And in the issue of that litigation and the
politics came not only the River District's Organic Act of 1937 but
also at the same time the State Water Board was created and I'm not
sure exactly when, but not very long after the Conservancy District
Act was created. And the Conservancy District Act is significant
in that it provides that where a transmountain diversion is promagated
by a Conservancy District that the use of water in the Colorado River
basin will not be increased in cost or reduced in availability with
the transmountain diversion compared to without a transmountain diversion.
The River District in its long history since 1937, and Eagle was one of
the original counties in the River District, and kind of interesting,
• I'm the third guy that's been in this job since 1937, there's only been
three of us, we're the reason that Green Mountain Reservoir exists,
which is the replacement and compensatory pool, and I'll get into
compensatory vs. replacement in a little bit, as related to the Colorado
Big Thompson Transmountain Diversion. Now that's the largest single
mountain diversion in the state. The Denver Water Board is very visable
and very convenient, but the big diversion is the C.B.T. The west slope
facilities are Lake Granby and Shadow Mountain and Grand Lake. It's
Appleby Thompson. And the River District is the reason that Reudi
Reservoir exists, also under a conservancy district act provision which
is the West Slope facility the compensatory.pool is Reudi Reservoir.
So.in all this process, we hold the decree for Reudi Reservoir and it's
been politicized quite extensively as far as Reudi is concerned. The
River District has throughout its life appropriated a lot of water on
the Western Slope and our history has been that we've appropriated
water for classic irrigation projects and normally what we do is turn
those decrees over to a conservancy district like Basil, we litigated
the decrees for the Caracanni (?) unit, the Big Cash Reservoir on
the Gunnison River as part of the upper Colorado River Project and
participating projects, we hold the decrees for West Divide and we
• prosecuted decrees for Dallas Creek which is under construction, and
Savory Pothook, and a whole lot of stuff. In the whole process of
working with water users, we have in the process of protecting those
decrees, spent a lot of time and a lot of work on the litigation and.
Page 3
at this point in time the City and County of Denver has a decree on
• the Piney River site of Eagle -Piney but they don't have a decree on,
they have a decree on the Eagle side of the Eagle -Piney, but they
don't have a decree on the Piney River side. They've got a decree
on Gore Creek but they don't have a decree on the East Gore Collection
System. They do not have a decree on the Straight Creek, part of the
Robert Snow Collection System, they do have a decree on the Darling
Creek extension of the Williams Gore Collection System, which is up
in Grand County. And on and on, so there's been a tremendous amount
of litigation which. the River District's engaged in and there's been
a tremendous amount of politics. At one time, the Western Slope was
one congressional district and maybe this will occur again. But one
of the big reasons that,!;for example, the Frying Pan Arkansas, the
project is the way it is, it was a compromise factor on the Big
Gunnison Arkansas. The West Slope saved a million acre fee when
we compromised that back to the Frying Pan Arkansas Project and
the Quid Proquo is Reudi Reservoir. The original replacement
facility was a reservoir 28,000 acre feet above the Town of Aspen
and while nobody wants a big earth -filled structure, well it's
not a big one - 28,000, sitting above a town, the real reason.that
Reudi, that the Aspen Reservoir wasn't built was that the access of
the dam went through Jim Smith's living room, former Under Secretary
of the Navy. That's the reason it wasn't built. So the compromise
back was for a reservoir to replace the anticipated 28,000 acre feet
which was to be diverted out of priority by the Frying Pan Arkansas
Project. See, when, under an appropriation doctrine, you cannot
divert out of priority and the FryArk in order to optimize the
transmountain diversion to 69,000 average in any given year would
be diverting out of priority and the call was Shoshone and the
Grand So that in order for the FryArk or the C.B.T.to
divert at times when the water was still there but the call was
on the lower river, they had to have replacement storage. So the
replacement at the C.B.T. is Green Mountain and because both of these
were done under the Conservancy District Act, each one of them includes
compensatory water and that's to compensate the Western Slope under the
Conservancy District Act with the loss of the water. It doesn't
necessarily mean it's going.to be.free but it's there and available.
So on the FryArk the replacement pool and the compensatory pool are
both in Reudi because nobody wanted the dam above the Town of Aspen,
they moved off the Roaring Fork onto the Frying Pan and they built it
at a site they found and the decision was made politically to build it
to the maximum hydro logic capacity of the location so it was built to
102,000 and the 28,000 is the replacement of the outbase diversions
and the decrees and House Document 130 and all these neat things are
that the remainder of that water is for beneficial use only in the
Western Slope. So in all of the waters of the State, the entire State
has an interest. In all the waters within the boundaries of the River
District, the entire River District has an.interest. So that in the
waters of Eagle County, you've got a lot of players. You've got the
City and County of Denver, you've also got the Cities of Colorado
Springs and Aurora, you've got I think the. old Carlton Tunnels in
Eagle County, so there's.a lot of interest in water.!, At this point
in time, as I understand it, the Town of Vail, and when I talk about
the Town of Vail, I mean from the confluence of Gore and Eagle River
to the Continental to the top of Vail Pass, there are water resources
issues that need to be addressed and maybe these are storage and maybe
they're other issues in which the River District is not a player. .We're
not interested in the distribution inside the Town of water, we're not
concerned so much about the sewer plant problems which have been in
the news once or twice lately, except as it might impact others. But
we're a water resource and water policy body and to that end, the
River District has the ability to appropriate and litigate and
engineering, we've got the ability,we probably have one of the most
unique financial packages of any body in the western United States.
• As far as a water agency is concerned. So that in all this the River
District has the ability to work with and help an organization like
the Town of Vail or a Conservancy District or a Water and San District
from the standpoint of making that water available to the people. Now
the City and County of Denver, of course, is looked upon as being kind
of a mean machine and they are. They're smarter than a whole tree
Page 4
full of owls. They've got one of the best domestic water systems in
the United States. There's no question about it. They've got some
• of the best lawyers and engineers as far as appropriated water is
concerned. They're water is famous for being high quality. But
the issues that we negotiate with Denver involve the water resources
itself and the litigation. So right now, the City and County of
Denver. is in my view in part hurting a little bit from the standpoint
of not getting those decrees. Now there isn't a bonding house in the
United States that will sell bonds to finance a water project.in
Colorado that doesn't have a decree. They just won't get the money.
But eventually they're going to get the decree, there's no doubt
about it. And if I told you any different, I'd be lying to you.
They are going to get decrees for the Piney River site and they are
going to get decrees for the Eagle Colorado. The price might be
pretty high. They're going to get a decree for the East Gore
Collection System. So that while you all are greatly concerned
about the City and County of Denver', and we are too, we're probably
litigating against them in 5 or 6 jurisdictions, I just can't keep
track of it, and the City and County of Denver they'll joshingly
say, "Well, hell, that water of the Town of Vail,
and they aren't going to do that because they can't sell water outside
of their own city and county and we're standing quite ready to litigate
the question and we think we're right. So, there are a lot of issues
involved here and the question of Gore Creek is going to be very
•
sensitive but Denver does have a decree to Gore Creek. They don't
have a decree to Piney River site of the Eagle -Piney Collection
System. Gore Creek, in my view, just can't, there isn't enough
water there to pay for all the capital equipment and all the capital
improvements that have to be constructed just to take the Gore Creek
water. So the question on Denver is going to be whether they get
a 1957 decree, a 1957 priority date or whether it's going to be
1980, there are those subtlities that are going to be.very important
to the City and County of Denver. We've had some telephone conversations
and I understand that Bill Miller.of the Denver Water Board is going to
come over and visit with you folks. If I were you,I'd tell him to stay
home. I'd say, "I'm the Mayor of Vail and I'm going to talk to the
Mayor of Denver". End of story: You might want to call the President
of the Denver Water Board Peggy Plugley and the Vice President Jim
Kenney and sit down with those people and I think that you might want
to visit with the Board or you .might want to visit with the elected
public officials. But you might want to tell the staff just to stay
the hell -home unless he wants to come over and ski. Tksixkixdxn:kxikzxg
You might want to consider doing that because you might want to say
that the Town of Vail is happy to talk to the City and County of Denver
and you can talk to Bill McHinkles and you can talk to Jim Kenney. But
you might not want to get the staff messed up in it. It's just like
when the Eagle County Commissioners appoint a River District Director,
they don't talk to the staff. They don't talk to me about that.. Dale
Grant tells me what to do and I try to do it. But generally, Dale will
say, "What do you think about this?". It quite often is, as far as the
River District Board is concerned when it comes down to something like
this, thank you for your opinion Fischer, now this is what we're going
to go do". And very often it's not .what I think ought to be clone. So
I think maybe you all ought to.think about talking to the top of the
pile. You guys are the top of the pile. Why don't you just talk to
the staff sort of thing. I throw out a lot of stuff and my advise kxx is
worth just what it cost you. But you might want to think about that.
Now the City and County of Denver is going to be pretty damn careful
about the approach they take. I should imagine that maybe 20% of the
mortgages on these buildings are held by Denver S&L's and;,banks.in this
town here - probably. So there's a lot of interest in Vail from the
business community of.the City and County of Denver. And that was
represented by the now Vice President'of the Denver Water Board Jim
Kenney. He's a dirt contractor. But, very intelligent guy and he can
be talked to. So I'd suggest, if 'you're going to talk to Denver, you
• might want to talk to the President .of the Water Board or even Bill
McNichols himself first. McNichols is in a position where he has
publicly stated that he wants to heal these water wounds between the
West Slope and the East Slope. He talked to Club 20 and he was very
Page 5
strong on the point and it wasn't 30 days -after .that that he wrote a
letter in support of a specific West Slope water project. The entire
congressional district wrote to the federal Regulatory Commission and
. said the City and County of Denver supports - boo. And the Denver
Water Board staff had absolutely refused to take that .kind of position
with the Mayor. So if you think you've got a problem with the City
and County then what you might want to do is talk to the City and
County and let the staff stay home. And then maybe the Denver Water
Board wit tell that staff to take a position of increased cooreration.
But on the questions of Western Slope water, I think as far as the
River District is concerned, we're pretty much in the big deep middle
of a lot of water and energy issues and this is really what you send
37 hundredths of a mill to the River District to do. As far as the
water questions with an energy industry we hear what the industry is
saying. They do alot of talking but what it's probably going to. come
down to, unless we're very careful, is theyre going to buy a lot of
senior agricultural rights and they're probably going to buy pre-1922
and pre -turn of the century. This will mean that the water's going to
be taken off the ground and the only other source of water for an
industry is going to be storage and the storage would be the alternative
source of water instead of just one source of water for an energy industry
in Western Colorado, that being irrigation agriculture, then if there's
the alternative source of stored water, then the political issues and
economic issues can combine to hopefully keep the agricultural base
. under northwestern Colorado. The industry right now'is in a posture
where it could buy.irrigation water and you can convert the consumptive
use portion during the irrigation season only and that sort of thing and
indeed the Town of Vail has done this. You all have acquired agricultural
water and in the process you're going take the water off that ground.
Now, the planning of that ground in condominiums, or if its farther
down other places in the Western Slope, planning it to oil shale
industry and that sort of thing, will some times improve or increase
the assessed valuation, but eventually the.impact will be quite .
serious. Especially in the energy industry, where in 50 - 100 years
the industry is gone and you find that ground on the tax rules as dry
land ground and no longer on the tax rules as irrigating ground and
you find that a decision about the relative value of a bussel of peaches
vs. a barrel of crude shale oil is made in Houston and Los Angeles and
Washington. The synthetic fuels Corp. could have had one hell of an
impact on Northwestern Colorado. And I think we're going to find that
companies like Exxon and Conoco and WR Grace, Phillips, they've got
more money than God and it's the Golden Rule and he who has the Gold
rules, no question about it. .So the River District is in a positon
where we're trying to tread this thin line of building storage and in
my view the only way we're going to get this West Slope water protected
is put it to beneficial use on the Western Slope. We've lost decrees on
• the Western Slope for several important projects including the Edwards
REservoir which is presently in appeal in the State Supreme Court because
we weren't able to show in that specific feature that we've been diligent
toward the application of that water to beneficial use. If we would have
had a contract, an agreement, with some water user in Edwards we would have
held that decree. I don't know what the outcome of the supreme court will
be, but we have pulled some out in the past, I.don't know if we're going
to pull this one out, but the only way we're going to have water on the
Western Slope is to store it and put it to beneficial use. There are alot
of ansiliary issues about the call at Lee Ferry, the question about
whether or not Denver stores outside ofthe ten year moving average,.and
moves it over to the two forks when its The question of the
issue of the White River between Colorado and Utah. The issues of in -
stream flow claims sometimes misnumbered, minimum flow, all these kind
of things and I see in some of the newspaper articles where you all are
thinking about the ground water under the golf course up here and that
issue about meeting Vail's water supply requirements and unless those
wells are going to be 5 or 6 or 7 hundred feet deep, that water's going
to be administered as surface water.and they'll call you out. You've
got like 15 second feet I think on the main stemof the Eagle that's
• probably senior to the waters that you've acquired as irrigation
waters and I would estimate that if the press reports are correct
that your technical people are thinking that that water under that
Page 6
golf course is nontributary. I'd be very careful. The State Engineer
I talked to yesterday intends this year to administer the Colorado River
if we don't get more precipitation or find a call on that River and it's
going to be probably the first time if we don't get more precipitation,
where we're going to see domestic wells shut down.
Wilto: Would you define beneficial use?
Rawley: The beneficial use question has been defined in case law and
is a very affemeral (?) thing. Beneficial use can be anon -consumptive
use like the power plant at Shoshone. Non=consumptive but beneficial
with the 1903 decree. The beneficial use classically is irrigation
and domestic. Domestic can include the watering of cattle.. Often
people think about what is really municipal. Now in the Vail system,
all of the water that goes into the municipal distribution system;
whether it's used for taking showers or drinking fountains,. or water
lawns or gardens, or in sanitary uses, they are all beneficial uses.
In all beneficial uses there are return flows. That is, in agriculture
very often 40 to 50% of the water is consumed in the growing of crops.
The remainder will come back into the stream. That's the reason for
the ability to convert only the consumptive use portion of irrigation
water because the down stream junior has a right to rely on that return
flow. And on a municipal system in the winter time you probably returning
95% of the water you take out. It just goes right back to the sewer
plant. In he summer time your domestic diversions might be 50% consumed
because of the fact that people are watering lawns and gardens with it.
Even washing the street is a beneficial use. Certainly fighting fires
and in a big municipal use like we always return in Colorado to the City
and County of Denver, the water oonsumed in the -generation of coal fire
thermal electrical energy is a beneficial use. So there are all kinds of
beneficial uses. A cow drinks water, that's a beneficial use.
Wilto: Where does the River District stand on what's happening in
Eagle County? It.doesn't seem like we hear much from you, although
we hear alot from other groups as far as fighting the Denver Water
Board and stratgey.
Rawley: Well, as I mentioned earlier, we're the reason that Denver
can't build the Eagle -Piney. They don't have a decree for`it.
Wilto: But you said they would get one.
Rawley: Sure they will. The question will be whether it's in 1957
or 198 And I don't think there's any doubt but what the City and
County could prove that they'd made a appropriation of water and that's
where it caught them last time. It caught them on two points. They.
had not specifically decided to make appropriation and therefore they
were - the Denver. Water Board just didn't act. The staff was out here
rattling around on the hillside but the governing body, the owner of
the water rights had not made an open and notorious decision. So
eventually, and any appropriations system, you can get a decree on
a dry walk. I can get a 19.81 decree for
Wilto: Explain exactly what a decree is.
Rawley: ,A decree is the document that is evidence ofa water right.
A.water right is established when the water is put to the demand's
beneficial use.
Slifer: Doesn't the decree come from the Court?
Rawley: Yes, its evidence in.the public record of your appropriation
of water. You've heard of divorce decree,.maybe. Divorce decree is
recorded in the court, well so is a water decree. You can have decrees
for all kinds of things. It's an action of the court.
Page 7
Wilto: It's also dated then, as far as the seniority goes?
• Rawley: Sure. The state engineer administers all of the waters of
the state based on decrees. In this particular part of the state,
were in Water Division 5, which is the main stem of Colorado, and
the key is that he will administer those water rights, those beneficial
uses in the order which the Court says the priorities are and that goes
by date. First in time is first in right. That's sometimes called the
doctrine of prior appropriation.
Wilto: What is your decree then for Eagle -Piney?
Rawley: We don't have a decree for Eagle -Piney. We just kept Denver.
Wilto: How did you do that?
Rawley: How did we do it? We went to court and after a long and
complex, hot trial down in Denver for the convenience of the parties,
it was a Water Division 5 judge and something like 1975 or 76 and we
proved to the Court that the Denver Water Board did not intend to
appropriate that water.and they.could not prove otherwise. And the
Court ruled yes, River District, you're right and that applied to the
East Gore Collection System which is the east side of the Gore Range
between Green Mountain Reservoir and Dillon. Straight Creek, which is
attributary to the Blue River that comes off of Montezuma Basin and
the Pass and all that country, but is attributary to the Blue below
Dillon where they were going to build a diversion back to Dillon. It
applies to the Piney River side of the Eagle -Piney Project, but back in
the Some long time ago, Denver did get a decree for the Eagle River.
side of the Eagle -Piney and that was a long supreme court fight wherein
on the Eagle River side of the Eagle -Piney Project the order of the big
beneficial users is first of all the Homestake Project. Second, the
River District and third, the city and county. Now that decree was
entered along time ago, but the River District's litigation against
Denver also ran to the question that Denver's, November, 1960, Eagle
Colorado system, and I've got all this on a blue lot here, wherein
Denver did not get a decree on the Eagle, Colorado system which is
the diversion from the Colorado State Bridge in Grand , over
to their reservior in Wolcott and Eagle County and their Wolcott
REservoir. The key to the whole thing is that no sensible engineer
or banker would build the Vail Pass Tunnel just for that little dab of
water available to Gore Creek without reason.
Wilto: Going back to decrees, why doesn't the River District have
• a decree on the Piney. River side of the Eagle?
Rawley: We've got a decree on a Piney Reservoir which is very
to if it ever gets a decree, it might be junior, but bear in mind, now,
that part's in the wilderness.
Wilto: It doesn't seem to matter though.
Rawley: Everybody says it doesn't, but I think it does. You're going
to get a presidential order to build a water project in there, and it
a presidential order will probably not issue even in the Reagan adminis-
tration unless your congressional deleation is 100% in favor.
Wilto: But they don't.have to be in favor.
Rawley: The President can do it unilaterally, but I dont,t think any
President would.
Slifer: How would you suggest we attack that issue. How do we persuade
the President not to sign that order?
Rawley: I don't think the order's pending before him, is it?
Slifer: No, it's not, but they're working on it.
Page 8
Rawley: Well, it's in their minutes. Do you get the Denver Water
Board minutes? Ask Jim Kenney, he'll send them to you.
• Slifer: Is -the best way just to lobby our delegation?
Rawley: Sure, I think it is. Bear in mind, Denver's going to bring
in some persuasive arguments to follow. Denver has more total people
impact and energy than the entire Western Slope and I think they can
prove it. They will try to be persuasive with both the Secretary and
the President of the United States to bust that loose, but I don't
think, in my view and bear in mind I've been politically wrong before,
that the President of the United States will do it without at least the
4th Congressional District and Armstrong and probably Gary Hart. If
that's the way they decide to do it, I know one thing.I would suggest
though, to answer your question, you may want to consider making a deal
with them. We have to remember that.the issue is not limited to this
end of Eagle County. The issue runs all the way to Grand Junction and
Gunnison and Rangley and Craig and their associated counties. The
question rose really clearly to Lee in Arizona in the 1922 and
the 1948 compact. The entire water resources question in Western
Colorado is linked to the ability of the Western Slope to use its
water from the standpoint of the entire Western Slope - from the
standpoint of the entire State of Colorado, I don't think that it will
hold politically in the legislature to force Denver to pump from Wolcott
• and put in a 3 thousand megawatt pumping plant. Someplace that electrical
energy is going to have to be generated to utilize energy for pumping when
we know that by far the best system in gravity: Now, I don't know if the
system would be built in the Piney River portion, Denver owns private land
up there, they own the land that the discharge end of the Vail Pass Tunnel,
the capital costs of - all water resources development is captial intensive,
and the capital costs of constructing the tunnels would be very high. But
the amount of money in municipality can pay for water, there's just no
upper limit. A municipality can pay any amount of money. There could
be a tradeoff with the filling of Green Mountain Reservoir, Denver holding
the water in Dillon, that would take an agreement with the United States
and would take an agreement with Northern Colorado because of the Green
Mountain Reservoir situation. You see, the decrees are that Green Mtn.
fills before Dillon and I don't know if you all remember anything about
this, but about 1976, the last draught, Denver withheld 28,000 600 acre
feet at Dillon and refused to release it downstream to Green Mountain.
And we sued them and eventually they broke tha-t water loose. But the key
as far as you all are concerned on a water supply for this end of the
Gore Valley, the key is the Shoshone call. The.issue of the esthetics
of water in Gore Creek itself is another matter. It's probable that all
these questions can be solved, but what it's going to take is a position
• of negotiation. Now the River District is presently in a posture on this
litigation where Denver's coming back in to retry the applications for
the decrees on those where they were knocked out.is tied with the River
District's diligence on several other Western Slope projects where
Denver's litigation to Dillon's River District. So we're litigating
them and they're litigating us and in the meantime we've had some
quiet negotiations going on on a staff level. And I've just say here
and told you not to mess with staff, on:the staff level of the Denver
Water Board and eventually we might be able to make a deal with Denver
on Denver's constructing ala the Conservancy District Act although it
does notapply to Western Slope facilities. I don't think there's any
question but what we can take into consideration the needs and the
desires to improve the water supply for the entire end of this Gore
Valley. You'd pay for it, you understand. We cant tax the entire
15 counties to build a facility.in one county. We've got some very
good financing tools. They're certainly available to all the constituents,
all the taxpayers. The west half of Rio Blanco County is going to build
a $13 million dollar reservoir under a River District sub -district and
the sub -district was created simply by petition of the Court.
Slifer: Are you saying that we could form a district under your district
• and finance water storage and those kinds of projects? But,we'd just pay
for it out of our taxes?
Page 9
Rawley: You could pay for it out of either revenue or GO bonds.
Wilto: The County could do that too?
0 Rawley: All I'm saying is we've got the tool.
Slifer: Back to the upper half of the Eagle County as a joint venture
with the Water District and the various towns and so on,
Grant: It is a sub -district and of course just like Rio Blanco, that
doesn't take in near all of Rio Blanco county. If you're ready to go
into it, you might go into Cross Creek a little bit.
Rawley: I'm just really kind of feeling my way in this rambling
monologue,
Slifer: We started on Edwards. Can we go back to that? What's going
to happen with Edwards? Is that going to get built?
Rawley: We are working with the Edwards Water District and we've supplied
them information on cost update on the Edwards Reservoir, we have run
some additional hydrology for those folks and I think what the River
District would do if they want to build the Edwards Reservoir, we'd
probably just •assign a,d-cree.
. Slifer: Is that whose proposal would go?
Rawley: Yes, that's the only people we've talked to, is the Edwards
Water District. A fellow named Bill Williams, Hubert Peterson.
Slifer: Would that put it to beneficial use?
Rawley: Sure. And what you do, you see, one of things that the Town
of Vail has to consider is the fact that it is entire possible, we haven;t
run any hydrology on this question, but my gut feeling just based on some
limited knowledge of the river is that Shoshone will call you out.
Rawley: Very.
Slifer: Is there's a very senior call?/ Is it in the Gore Valley?
Rawley: No, it doesn't have to be in the Gore Valley. Grand Valley
in the Roller Dam at Plateau Creek will call you. ThmxRxkixNxwskux
Slifer: If the water.got really low, they could just say, everybody
stop, we want our water.
Rawley: That's what I meant by the fact that the State engineer said
• that it's his gut feeling that they're -:going to administer the Colorado
issue. Because of the draught.
Slifer: You said wells would be shut off. Are you talking about
domestic wells?
Rawley: I think he'll administer to domestic wells this year if they're
tributary to a stream.
Slifer: Like a golf course or whatever.
Rawley: Yes, I think your golf course bought some irrigation water,
didn't they? If you drill a well in the on that golf course this
year and you want to supptyten condos with it and you've got a 1981
water right, I don't think there's any question they'd be shut off.
Wilto: If it's contributary to the stream?
Rawley: I don't see how it could not be. That's the kind of thing
you're dealing with. The issue, if Vail is looking for a water supply,
if you think that water will be a critical issue in the future of the
• Town of Vail, that is to protect the economy, then I think you're going
Page 10
to have to look to some physical solution and certainly as far as the
Shoshone call is concerned, it is probable that if you have, say,
. Edwards Reservoir, you could replace your upstream diversions with
releases from Edwards Reservoir. This assumes cooperation with the
Edwards Water District and slot of things. There would be a lot
of players in the Edwards Reservoir game. So that if you're concerned
about it, what you really ought to is to take alook and see where you
think you want to go and what you think your water supply situation
is. I think that all the water that you acquire from what I can see,
if that there's probably 15 second feet at least of senior agricultural
water downstream in the Town of Vail senior to the.r.ights that you all
acquire. That's in addition to Shoshone.. The possibilities are
limited by your imagination. We talked four or five years ago to
folks up here about a reservoir in Sandstone Creek, got the River
District;s decrees available to you that would include water from
the Iron Mountain Reservoir over on Homestake Creek, the River
District decrees are junior to Bomestake, but on Cross Creek a
cursory look at a topo sheet you could probably grab any water clear to
here.around the nose and up which would probably require a little bit
of storage. The water quality would be very good. Your issue's going
to be probably twofold: 1. The direct water supply to the Town so
that you can continue in periods of draught, every draught that comes
along is unusual, like this never happened before. We've got to
. a computer model of the Colorado River that said we could have years
like 1934 and 1976, we could have 40 years like that back to back.
There's just no doubt in my mind. If this country was any wetter
we wouldn't have pinon and juniper trees, we'd have other stuff.
The vegetation would be entirely different. The hills would not
be sharp, they'd be rounded because of precipitation and erosion.
Streams that are more than just intermittent. It's a possibility.
What you'll have to do is think about what you want to do to protect
the Town. If you do so that there's the possibilty that you're going
to have the direct water supply question, then you're going to have to
the replacement question which is entirely the reason that the Conservancy
District and the entire reason the Denver Water Board - you see, the
Denver Water Board Williams Fork Reservoir is not a facility for diversion
to Denver, its a replacement facility. It's to replace Shoshone and the
Grand Valley call. That's what that's all about. It's a big reservoir
and in Reudi you've got the question of replacement water - 28.000 in
Reudi. So that the FryArk can continue to divert and the 52,000 out of
152,000 in Green Mountain. That's replacement water. So that there's
all these things. So the key as far as you're all concerned of the
junior water right is the Shoshone and there will be some water you,
can store on top of the hydrograph and that you'd want to get in a
bucket soemwhere. These are the things that if you all are thinking
• about it, then you might want to think about the entire top of Vail
Pass down maybe all .the way to Edwards. But Edwards can do that and
the River District's Iron Mountain Reservoir could certainly do it, a
junior Sandstone Reservoir could help, but you want to be real careful
on the hydrology on that and the issue about the City and County of
Denver should be approached very coldly and very objectively. You're
going to have to recognize that of the hundred members of the legislature,
you've got ten on the Western Slope and Denver will not hesitate
to go for a political solution. They just won't. And when it comes
down to it, all those metropolitan Fort Collins to Pueblo legislatures
will vote right with them. They're very obvious, they're very easy to
paint in a black hat, and we do it slot, but,. I'm. advising my people
to be .awful careful.about that, can you can sure lose.. We're negotiating
with Denver ourselves to try to get some kind of sense driven into that
staff.,associated with the Board, I've talked to the mayor, all that kind
of thing, but when it comes down to it, the economical political cloud
is on the other side of the Continental Divide.. The River District is
in a position to help you, we think we that if you'•re.interested in
taking a look at some of these questions, that's exactly what we're here
for, but we think we've had enough experience to know when we'd lose.
• Slifer: Are we better off building multiple small ones on the minor
tributaries or are we better off-putting all our eggs in one big dam?
Page 11
Rawley: That would probably come out of the study. I am not one whose
very strong on studying stuff to death. I think you can solve that
. problem quite quick.- real quick. It would just be a matter of cost.
Wilto: You mentioned you were involved in litigation with the Denver
Water Board. Would it be possible for us to get a list of those issues?
Rawley: Yes, it would take a while to have them drawn up.
Wilto: Just a brief synopsis.
Slifer: Where is your office?
Rawley: Third floor of the First National Bank -Building in Glenwood.
Wilto: Who all is on that Bord?
Rawley: 15 Directors, one from each individual county, and I could
start with Eagle -Dale, Summit -Liz Etime, Grand -Gene Richard, Gratt-
Westside, Moffat -Gene P.eugh, Garfield -George Petrie, Pitkin-Bob Child,
Mesa -Andy Williams, Rio.Blanch-Ken. Kenney, Gunnison -Rile Lay,.Montrose-
Guy Mock, Ouray-Ron Steeley-----_---- The directors are appointed
by the Boards of County Commissioners for terms of three years.
Rawley: All I can say is the more I learn about water, the less I
understand it. It's one of these dump things where people build
careers on water and you can get hooked on it from the standpoint
of the litigation. The river's the most litigated river in the
world and the questions - the river is surrounded by an awful lot
of emotionalism. I hear alot of Western Slope people talk about
our water. The water belongs to..the people of the State of Colorado
and what you have to do is try to pick those arenas where you think
you can either litigate or negotiate or just'.plain outsmart the players
in order to keep water on the Western Slope. The River District's
problem, if we had the dollars we'd have this whole western slope
full of reservoirs. But the River District levies 37 hundredths
o a mill. The intent was that we would work with the Bureau of
Reclamation to put water on the ground'to irrigate and you see -.a
Conservancy District can go into debt but a conservation district
cannot. A River District cannot go into debt. A Conservancy District
is formed with the intent of going into debt and they go into debt by
contract with the United States. So it's a question of dollars, it's
a question of what kind of deal you can make.. Sometimes we can
negotiate from a position of strength or relative strength as we do
with the City and County or as we did with -Northern Colorado and
sometimes our weaknesses are just obvious and the political arena -
is one of those obvious weaknesses... When they redistricted the State
of Colorado.the intent was to give Aurora and Colorado Springs a sure
Republican se Then the split the West Slope horizontally and so
Wayne Aspen/1 t the primary and that was the dumbest thing in the
world -the Democrats ever did. Wayne was.the Chairman of the House
Committee. And when Wayne was on that
committee and the East Slope was in front of the Congress and said they
wanted Federal money to build the FryArk he said, "You make your piece.
in the State of Colorado and don't come back here until you do." And
that's what did it. So that you've got all these issues which nobody
can understand. You've got guys like Frank Delaney who wrote the River
District Statute and Barnard,,Wayne Aspenall, a whole lot of guys. Some
of them have been criticized -from the standpoint that they were rapers
and ravagers of the environment. This isn't true because you've got the
issue of the ability to irrigate ground, the ability to put the water to
beneficial use, and the.water's very capital intensity, as any town finds
out when they want to build storage. Denver's able to build so much
storage because they sell revenue bonds that are backed up by GO's, the
property of all the citizens of the city and county. They're getting
tired of that, the citizens of the city are tired of pledging their
real property for what they view to be the benefit of Aurora and Littleton
Page 12
and that sort of thing. There are a lot of political issues there"
too, but the ability to work in Colorado's water is found mostly in
. alot of these old heads that have been around long enough to know where
some of the bodies are buried. The River Districts can call on alot
of this experience. The President of the River District Board has
been president for over 20 years. While there is a perception along
time in Colorado water the water belonging to':the West Slope or the
water belonging to Eagle County, it just doesn't. The question of
instream flow claim and the value of the,State Board being able to
appropriate water in -the streams can quite well be taken care of by
the compact called state law. The net result is over appropriating
and over delivering the compacts in many cases, much to the detriment
of Colorado's tax payers and population. The question of the Central
Arizona project, for example, very often criticized by my friends in
the environmental community and I've seen California irrigation.
criticized in a Washington D.C. hotel in the middle of February
with snow raging outside while the criticizers were eating California
strawberries flown in that day. The issue of the ability to use water
the question of what the framers of the Constitution intended and the
ability to build an economy in this end of Eagle County whether.you're
making snow with it - I like it - I ski up here and the ability to
continue to have an economy.and the ability to continue to water
this population so that these people here will continue to pay the
• mortgages and the town and the county don't wind up with a whole
lot of empty condos at tax time, I think that those are some of the
things we're talking about here. The River District stands very much
ready and we welcome the opportunity to provide what little expertise
we might to help solve these problems. Certainly you get into. questions
like Reudi Reservoir and the question of whether or.not Grand Junction
should be allowed to have a drink of water out of that reservoir is a
very real issue . Very real, from the standpoint of the intent of
Reudi of whetheror not 35,000 acre feet of water is going to enough
just to sustain recreation and that sort of thing. The Reudi water,
can supply Silt, Newcastle, Debeck, Parachute, Grand Junction,
especially through the Ute Water Conservance District, and the
question of making that low cost water available to those people down
that valley as opposed to forcing them into the bond market and impacting
their ad valorem taxes to build storage like $3,000 per foot, that's where
we're talking. The guy in Grand Junction paid for the River District
to litigate that question and he thinks he got a right to that water.
Wilto: It seems that there were other parties that also paid for
that reservoir;
Rawley: Absolutely.
Wilto: They also have a right to the.beneficial use of that water.
Rawley: They do, indeed, as .they set -out in the decree.
Wilto: One thing I wanted to say just so you don't misunderstand
where at least a couple of us are coming from, I don't think that I
or several of the other people at this table are questioning Denver's
right to the waters in this area. We are questioning the.meth.od of
taking the water. That's where we need your help.
Rawley: One of the things you're going to find is Miyt that water is
coming from a collection system off the National Forest, the national
forest is going to impose a bypass or something, there's no question
about it.
Page 13
Slifer: We met with the Forest Service and they absolutely took a
hands off position and they will take that until they're drug into..
Rawley: The reason is the question of the reserve rights is in
litigation.
Slifer: Well, we're talking to the Number 2 guy on the national
level and they just don't want to take a position .until they're forced
to. They've lost on the minimum stream flow in California and New
Mexico.
Rawley: It was merely stream flows, it was reserve rights wasn't
it?
Slifer: I don't know, I'm not sure I understand the difference.
Rawley: Well the question on what the forest can use its water for
and the question in New Mexico came down that the forest can use water
has a water right dated at .the time of the reservation as the time the
forest was created. They've got a water right as of that date for the
purpose for which the forest was created and in.that case was for
growing trees. And that's probably why he's staying off that question
right now. Plus the political climate is unsettled. They don't know
. where they're going from the standpoint of the politics and they will
probably stay clear of it for quite a long while. So the issues of
the utilization and municipal purposes of water in Vail and the
utilization for municipal purposes in Grand Junction or Debeck or
Grand Valley are all pretty. much the same as far as the River District's
concerned from the standpoint of helping our people and our tax payers
get a water supply for municipal purposes. and that's what we're here for.
Slifer:. What's the status of Iron Mountain now? Are there any plans.
to proceed with that or is that open for possibility of conservancy
district up here?
Rawley: Well, it would.be open for possibility of construction, I
don't know if you'd want to form a conservancy district as the subtlities,
and again, you all can't be expected to have any kind of background in this
kind of thing, but instead of a conservancy district you might want to
from a River District.sub-district or something like that.
Wilto: But that would still be open and debatable?
Rawley: Yes, and for the Town of Vail, you may not want to look at
that much storage, you're looking at 68,000 acre feet, that's a whole
bundle of water, but it's senior to them and it would take Denver right
off of the Eagle River. The opportunity, to build it in cooperation with
the City and County of Denver should not be dismissed.
Wilto: Or, how about with one of the oil companies? I don't know if
that's public information at this time, but is that some of the basis of
your discussions on.the staff level with the City and County of Denver?
Cooperative joint.venture?
Rawley: Yes, we've talked to them about Iron Mountain and they're not
very enamored with it, we've talked with them about Euna, a reservoir
in Rock Creek, Edwards, and that's about it. In a case like Asure
Reservoir the only reason Northern Colorado's going to build Asure
Reservoir for the benefit of the Western Slope is because we
the State Supreme Court. They're very pleased now to cooperate because
they were not going to get that 68,000 acre feet out of the headwaters
of the Colorado. That's the only reason. They turned very cooperative
after a while. One of the issues with Denver which you don't want to
forget is that the inflation clock just keeps ticking away. That water
has become evermore expensive . Same thing applies to you, you understand,
• if you build a facility now. As the the City and county, you've got the
page 14
question of pay me by, they keep saying 1985, I don't know if that's
true or not, certainly by 1990, they're going to have to have some
new water.
• Grant: This is the report that the River District and the western
engineers who worked with the River District made for Bill Williams
and Hubert Peterson after we had had a meeting down in Edwards and I
think some from Vail was invited to that meeting. I don't remember,
we had quite a few there. At that time Mr. Calhoun had offered to
donate a certain amount of land to the River District for a reservoir
down there. It had quite a few ifs and buts about that too. There
was quite a bit put on it - too much of a deal, so then the River
District made this report and sent it to the Edwards bunch and you're
welcome to that. We are definitely in favor of building that Edwards
REservoir. As far as the County -is concerned, we're not in the water
business and don't intend to me.
Slifer: You'd rather see the Colorado River Water District or sub-
district operate.
Grant: Yes,'that subject is,working very well in Rio Blanco.
Wilto: From a practical standpoint, how fast or how distant,'obviously
could never happen, but how fast could the district be set up and could
• a sub -agency or sub -district, or could the River District proceed in
completing the plans and actually getting something underway?
Rawley: If you're talking about a sub -district, it requires a petition
to the River District Board and subsequently going to the District Court,
the petition being of all the landowners.affeeted and,the District Court
would have to issue a decree and then there's a 30 or 00 day protest
period. It would take a certain amount of time to determine the
boundaries. What we did in the West third of Rio Blanco County, was
we used the school district boundaries. We used the same boundaries
of that particular school district. I think that depending on the
speed of the court it would take to have all of the organizational
tools in place, it would take about 9 months probably, realistically.
Wilto: You say all the affective land owners. If our .case, would that
be all of Eagle County?
Rawley: No, if you're thinking about - it depends on how far you
intend to go with it. It would not be the entire county, because
if you're all thinking about Vail, or if you're thinking about Vail
plus Edwards down to Benchmark or something like that, that's what
it would include.
Wilto: One hundred percent of the landowners?
Rawley: No, but I don't know what the number is.
Slifer: Is an election required?
Rawley: No, but it requires, if you do a bond issue, if you do.a general
obligation bond issue, it requires an election, if you do a revenue bond
issue, it does not require an election. The River District could do.a
revenue bond financing without a.sub-district, there is one thing you
all should know about a River District sub -district. The Board of the.
sub -district and the staff of the sub -district are exactly the same as
the Board and staff of the River District.
0
Page 15
Wilto: So we would not have local control?
Rawley: Do you think Rio Blanco County has local control? Dale?
Grant: Yes, I certainly do. I've never seen anybody go against
anything that any one of us brought to them, we certainly listen
I have never heard any of them against anything at all since I've
been on that board. When I first became a commissioner the Iron
Mountain Dam was being considered at that time to be built. I
knew absolutely nothing about it at all. I had no idea what Iron
Mountain meant or anything, but Loskey asked me to go down to the
River District and tell them that Eagle County was against that
Iron Mountain Dam. Well, I did that. Rawley Fischer hit the
ceiling about twice before he settled down. They'd been working
on that and the only reason that Al had sent me down there was
because that some of them at Redcliff decided had decided that
they didn't want that reservoir, They'd spent piles of money
already and a called in my vote and went back to find out what
I was doing for sure.
Wilto: Is there any restriction on your property tax mill levy?
.Rawley: Yes, there certainly is.. The total that the River District
can lend is seven tenths of a mill. We levy .37 that max is .7.
• Slifer: What does that generate.in revenues?
Rawley: 4 hundred and something ---
Slifer: Where does most of that money go?
Rawley: Certainly legal is the .largest single category in administrative
budget, but a great deal of it goes to support the staff, including me,
we have four permanent employees and we're going to hire three more in
the near future. We're going to have to go to House Council - we're
going to hire an engineer. We have a fairly large construction budget
and I think the big end of it is the administrative budget. A lot of
that is the operation of office itself and legal. We do cooperate a
great deal with Colorado electric - we're trying to build a $2,000,000.
facility on the Jampa River and that will be the largest single body
of water in the state plus an afterbay of 200,000 acre feet. We're
using Colorado Ute Electric Association's funds for the front end
costs of that with the exception of the litigation. And then we'll
finance that on revenue bonds .with the taker pay contract with Colorado
Ute.
Grant: Eagle County's bringing in $57,350.
Slifer: You could double your revenue.
Rawley: Yes, but the attitude of the Board is to make the budget and
then the levy. And it has been the philosophy of.the Board that we
should not be carrying large surpluses forward because the tax payers
would be better off to put the money in their own savings account
instead of the River District's. That has created some small amounts
of problem as to funding but basically my attitude is it's worked
pretty well. We have had to made deals on water resources facilities,
we've got some options with the Colony Group at Exxon, other companies,
by in large we've got a lot -of consultants, we've got an engineering
firm in Denver, one in San Francisco,.onel n Grand Junction. 8 lawyers.
Yes, we could douple our revenues, no question about it. You've got to
get past the 107% limitation, and we might do that this year. We think
we've been doing what we were organized to do and the way the Board is
configured , we have an overlay of many Boards.
Page 16
Grant: Our three commissioners decided that one of us should sit
on the River District Board Commission because w49 understood what
our land use problems were and also could stay ,up on what the River
District was doing. We had this 208 program which the River Distrist
• does not approve of because of certain legalities in it that probably
we'll lose when we go over in court, I remember here the other day,
the judge threw us out so fast WC- didn't even know he was there, but
we took it to the Court of Appeals and they are going to hear it so
evidently he was wrong in what he'd done.
Rawley: We're trying to battle with the Council of Governments to
see if we can establish some means of litigation.
Hawley: One thing I think you should try and consider.working with
the River District on your water supply is that you have'to consider
the relative position of your priorities of your water supply. The
availability of water, you're going to hire your own entineers, your
own lawyers, and that sort of thing but if you are thinking about
increasing your water supply to the Town of Vail so.many issues that
the River District has some small amount of expertise in that we stand
ready to utilize for you. We think that we can be of help and you're
sending 37 hundreths of a mill to us you might as well use it.
Slifer: I think you could help us a
coming and I'm sure we'll want to get
• of things we want to do as a Town and
may need a little more ammunition.
40
lot and I appreciate you all
back to you. We've got a lot
your advice is well taken. We