THE COL ORADO BASIN ROUND TABLE P.0. BOX 1120 GLENWOOD SPRINGS, COLORADO 81602 James S. Lochhead Front Range Water Council 1600 West 12th Avenue Denver, CO 80204?3412 Dear Jim, Thank you for your letter and explanation as to why you have declined our Colorado River Basin Round Table Demand Management Work Group?s invite to meet and discuss issues of mutual concern about the complex topic of demand management. I was extremely disappointed and discouraged to receive this letter. Folks from both sides of the divide have been saying publically that the Roundtables need to share information and that the state needs to see beyond historical divides to ?nd solutions that work for us all. Jim and I were also inspired by conversations among chairs and others from the West Slope and Front Range who attended the June 20 Four West Slope Basin Roundtables meeting in Grand Junction. We made a commitment to seek ways to further communications and ?nd ways to learn more about issues that are so emotive across the state. In the context of demand management, it has been suggested that perhaps our workgroup has been making too much of a deal about the potential hit to our west slope agriculture and rural communities. We wanted to explore that and hear from FRWC folks to better understand how you are viewing the issues. We also ?gured that building connections and relationships with historically ?adverse? parties could only help in the future as the state works its way through this issue, and many more to come. Hence the invitation to join us on Oct. 28, or later at everyone?s individual convenience. To be clear, there is no dispute from us about the importance of the CWCB Demand Management Policy, but we disagree with the characterization that this would be an ?of?cial side meeting.? There is nothing ?side? about it as the concept goes to the heart of what the Roundtables are urged to do have interbasin discussions. And we never saw it as an ?of?cial? meeting in the sense of seeking position statements. We intended all along, and I shared this with Bill Paddock, that the meeting be an informal conversation and sharing of information. Yes, the CWCB has a process for its exploration of demand management feasibility. But that process is limited to very small groups of ?experts? and cannot possibly include all of the ag, muni, recreational and environmental folks who participate in our Roundtable and give up their time to participate on our demand management workgroup. Page 2 The CWCB process is very valuable for what it is, but I believe strongly we need to be having inclusive and diverse conversations about demand management and other water issues. I do not believe that the CWCB ever intended for its ?of?cial? process to preclude such efforts as ours. Just last week at the C-9 Summit, Brent Newman stated that the Roundtables are a part of the demand management process. Given that the CWCB meetings are open and the press can attend, we do not understand why their potential presence at our work group meeting would be such an inhibiting factor. It was reassuring to read that the FRWC is working towards solutions that bene?t the entire state without causing disproportionate risk to speci?c geographic areas or economic sectors, but it would go a whole lot further on this side of the hill to have face to face conversations with the people who are worried about their livelihood and way of life. Jim and I remain committed to fostering discussion between our west slope constituents and the east slope constituents. Our offer to come Visit with our work group remains open. I hope over time that the FRWC or individual members will reconsider the position being taken now. Since?, 12mm M. Chair Colorado River Basin Roundtable Demand Management Work Group