HomeMy WebLinkAbout640178.tiffAttorney
It would be beneficial to myself if the questions be directed to
my partner or myself with respect with to the manner in which we
propose to approach the formation of this district. The reason that
the bounds are designated as they are set forth. We are trying to
accomodate to the best of our ability and to also suggest and aid
the people who are representing the petition and any information they
might have concerning the proposed district.
Mr. Shultz; Do you have the proof of publication?
Attorney:
S DOOM,/
Yes, there are the proof of publication, the tax certificate,
certified as of the date of the petition or close to it - as contained
here, now ther are two separate pages, one contains the later certificate
as we had planned to do this back in December and were not able to.
These are the changes and this is the tax roll indicating that there
/.,yn/ 7g
is a majority of the landowners signing as petitioners, and a
majority of the acreage and we are fairly well over on the number
and considerably over on the acres so that we didn't have to bother
to get it exact, also the original copy of the petition, and a copy
of the proposed district.
Mr. Shultz We will be happy to file this, Do any of the landowners have anything
they might care to say at this time.
Attorney Just as a point of interest, before you get into it, the lbjections that
can be made by a landowner is to the fact that he is not going to be
in the distict or his land would not be benefited by the district.
I can read the applicable statute if it would help you.
Mr. Shultz:
Attorney:
Mr. Shultz:
Mr. Wagner:
Just give the statute number
47-1-8 CRS 1953
John Waggner do you have anything you would care to say?
I am here in behalf of Mrs. Wagner, my wife, and she owns the southwest
quarter of Section 17. I objeto that in - her land will not be
benefited to be included, I don't have any objections to this because
I think it is necessary. Mts Wagner has no drainage problems, she
has gone to the expense of buying a full right in the trunk line drain
that goes clear to the creek.., known as the Wagner Drain. She has
a right for the entire place in that and as far -as waste is concerned
its nearly the same story. She has a waste way that goes all the way
to the creek and there is only 8 acres in this while tract where the
waste water can not be taken to the creek in her own waste way to the
creek. Now it would be a silly thing for us to run water into that lake
in favor of pumping it out again. And another thing I would like to
bring out this piece of land that is represented here slopes away
3
from the lake is 3/4th of it. You could not get water back to the
lake unless you a ditch around it. At the lower end of it
where it points out here down next to the highway, it used to be
by the Bindshaw Ditch and some of that water
could not be taken to the east inner waste ditch, but now that
we have an underground ditch it does not interfere anymore. All but
one acre of that corner goes east.
Mr. Shultz; Knowing the place up there, I have to agree with you because I know how
your land lays.
Louis Bein: I do not agree with John Wagner figures as to the amount of water
- land - that slopes into the lake. I will say that this line is drawn
to follow the Bindshas Ditch and everything west of this ditch did go
into Newell Lake and went into there for many years and contributed
as much probably as the average amount of land in this area toward
the increase in this lake. This 28ke:in -1952 was no problem at all.
In a matter of ten years, it raside 25 or 30 feet vertically and it all
came from the extra use of Grand Lake Water. Now since the last two
years this ditch was removed and as a result there is a considerable
amount of this portion of John's land that does now drain to the east but
it did not until two years ago and I say this land did contribute to the
filling of Newell Lake as much as any of it. Now whether or not there
is 8 or 10 acres I do not know, this could be measured and adjusted
maybe. As far as the Wagner Drain is concerned, there are no trunk
lines going to this area at all.
Mr. Wagner: She (Mrs. Wagner) has a full right in that trunk line.
Mr. Bein: Yes, you surley have a right in the Wagnr Drain.
Mr. Wagner: Well, wr"ave a drain within a hundred yz 's of that we can hook onto
and we don't have any seepage there at all, it is high pump land and
contributes a very little water to the lake. You don't pump water
up on a hill and then run it off into the lake. You use it when you
pump it up.
Mr. Good: There are no drainage that go into the Wagner Drain on that portion
of land that will be included here.
Mr. Being
It has been hard to set this district up, a lot of people feel it may or
may not contribute to the problem of the lake, some have drains, some
have surface drainage out of it and some had noen, and this is the only
piece of ground that has objected to coming in. I know that on the
south there are two quarter sections that a good share are out entirely,
but these people are coming in with all their land to simply make this
more feasible for everyone and I feel that in as much as this grand
was in the drainage area for up until two years ago and contributed to
this lake rising, that it should be included.
Mr. Wagner: Louis, I would like to correct you on one thing, the east part of that
never had one drop of water ever run in to that lake. It either went into
your ditch or went right across into our ditch. You can't get it around
there, you couldn't get it there, it wouldn't go.
Mr. Shultz: Louis would you state about how many acres of the Wagner land would
drain into the lake.
Mr. Hein: At present, no I can't state, this could be measured, I would think
an adjustment on this would be alright with me if they draw a line across
there. This isn't going to be expensive, I think the cost on this
will be about $10.00 an acre scattered over a 10 year period. And
8 acres is not going to hurt anyone.
Mr. Wagner: I wuld be willing to make an adjustment,,I.want to pay for what I run
in there and I think this thing should be set up so everyone pays fot the
the water they run in the lake. The acre basis is not right at all,
one acre produces water and another one doesn't. I don't know what
would you say 7 or 8 drains (farms) into the lake. No consideration
or determination as far as I am concerned has ever been made to try and
find out what water they produced. They are the boys that fill the
lake up.
Mr. Bein:
Mr. Ewing:
Mr. Rein:
Mr. Ewing:
Mr. Rein:
Mr. Goods
If you get into this problem you get
to ascertain the acre foot of water
know that there are drains that come
into the complication of trying
make it impossible John. Sure I
off of certain lands, but how
are you going to measure the water in terms of as opposed to irrigation
water running off, and to me you have to hit a balance and practical
way of getting around it and go ahead.
That would be quite variable
different times depending on
It would vary as to the time
the next.
the amount of water contributed at
the amount of irrigation being done.
of year, it would vary from one year to
In other words you think this would be more feasible to just take a set
figure to make it more equitable to all people concerned.
Yes, we felt this is the only way we could get out of it. Once you
start an engineering survey to measure the amount of water running out
of each one of these drains you carry this on back up to where the drains
terminate, I feel this would cost more than the project.
I might insert, that there is a solution provided for this in the
statutes there is a statutory procedure of setting up the amount that
these particular lands should contribute to the expense of the district.
This is laid out in statute and pretty well has to be conformed to
like in the other districts, a great deal of discression has to be put
5
in the Board of Directors that are finally elected to pursue the
administration in this particular district. It provided that the
Board of Directors and this is a rough background on this, it provided
that the Board of Directors will set up classes of acerage, of
approximately 40 acres per track. That they will start with a 100
percent and will designate those who will get the maximum benefit
from the drainage system at 100 percent and then they designate
right down the line a percentage of a 100 percent that they feel
the other tracts of land derive in benefit from the particular
drainage district. Now that is a rugged thing to do but as Mr. Bein
has pointed out it is almost impossilbe to come to an exact figure
but at least there is discretion there but they do anticipate that
the Board of Directors will make an effort to divide the expense
in accordance with the benefit that is derived by the land that are
included within the bounds, So even though you do include the total
acerage here in the initial bounds there is still a provision of
discretion left to the board and directors to adjust the assessment
made on individual tracts to reflect the amount of benefits that those
tracts are deriving from the district and perhaps that would be the
proper solution to the objections of a lot of people that they don't
derive the same benefits from this that others would.
Mr. Bein:
Mr. Good
The only one that has raised objection to this so far is Mr. Wagner
I think that the chore of saddling a board with the responsibilities
of classifying this large district in terms of 40 acres is just
impossible and I think that I would rather adjust the situation
with Mr. Wagner, in what he thinks is fair and what we think is fair
and remove this much land from the district. I believe this can be
done at this time
Well actually Lew, at the time we organized this initially we attempted
to do it on the unanimous base, so that there wouldn"t have to be the
the expense of election publication, the substantial expenses that are
incurred through the longer procedure which of course we did have
finally to pursue, if you can come to an agreement with the landowners
there is no reason why the landowners in the district can not agree to
a means of apportionment of the tax, the statute does provide however
for means of providing another way to approach it if you can't reach
that agreement.
Mr. Bein:
Mr. Wagner:
We have gone this far, Mr. Wagner of course is the one who prevented
us from having a unanimous agreement and at not time has he made any
proposal to us as to what he will accept.
I made the proposal to Mr. Brooking that I would go in on any fair
basis and I told you the same thing in the bank that day, that I
would go along with whatever was fair. As far as the proposal is
concerned, I didn't write out exactly what I would do and what I would't
it didn't seem that anyone was interested.
Mr. Shultz: We feel here that it is your problem to arbitrate this thing to make
it fair and justifiable to everyone concerned and I am sure that John
Wagner will cooperate and I feel positive of that, so I believe if it
was done here today it would be a good thing. The adjustment to be
made here today John, this is the place to do it here right now, have
it settled. Then as I understand it they can go ahead with the district
Is that correct counselor?
Mr. Good:
Yes, this is what this hearing is for is to adjust boundaries. Just
to adjust the boundaries. We can hear the objection of anyone to
either add to the boundaries or subtract from the boundaries and come
to a conclusion on that base. The description can be adjusted to
reflect that and procede with the election and so forth.
Mr. Wagner: It would have been a lot better if the people who has started to
make this district if they had gone to the trouble to consult me
before putting the land in there. The district was made and I was in
it before I heard about it.
Mr. Bein:
This is not quite true, we took this petition to you on a voluntary
basis and we showed it to you and you said you wouldn't sign it you
didn't say you would accept a certain portion in the district you
just said you didn't want to be in it, so therefore we had to go
through this mandatory election procedure. I think if you had come
in and said this portion of it should be in I think we would have
gone along with you because we had everyones signature but not yours,
at that point. But this is past history, let us see what we can do.
Mr. Wagner: There is no point of us arguing any further, you aay one thing and I
say another, lets drop that part of if. Louis, what do you thing is
fair?
Mr. Bein: How many acres are in that parcel 22, approximately 53.4 acres.
Mr. Wagner: Thirty-five acres of that is pump land and is high and dry.
Mr. Bein: Well its irrigated.
Mr. Wagner: So is that right across the road of Mr. Cooks as far as that is concerned,
Mr. Bein:
Mr. Wagner:
Mr. Bein:
Mr. Wagner:
Mr. Cook is not There is also some land down there in
the Mattis Nelson land.
But Louis we will agree that it is irrigated.
Thats right
But it don't produce waste water, no one turns the water in there
at night because they don't want to go set it or on Sunday when
water is plentiful_ that it wh�4 ....
this lake. People around it that don't take care of their water will
turn it in there and us neighbors siet around there and pull our hair
out cause we have to pump it out.
Mr. Greip:
Mr. Wagner:
Mr. Shultz:
We also have the problem of storm water too.
As far a natural rain is concerned, I don't think we are concerned
with it. That lake never filled up until we started to irrigate.
As far as the natural run off the county has three miles of road
there to drain into it. The state highway has a mile and an eighth
of road there. I don't believe that part should be taken into
effect into the account of the natural run off. It always did drain
there.
How many acres John, do you feel you have that lays toward the lake
that is the question that is in my mind and now I am pretty familiar
with the area.
Mr. Wagner: You mean that slopes toward the lake.
Mr. Shultz: Thats right, including the pump land.
Mr. Wagner: Probably 15 acres, nothing on the south slope goes toward the lake.
Mr. Good: Would you settle for 15 acres.
Mr. Wagner: Probably 15 acres all total. There are 7 acres on the north end that
I can not drain the water back the other way. But Mr. Shultz asked
me what sloped toward the lake, that is what slopes toward the other
slopes away. It was never in that drainage basin.
Mr. Shultz: If I can recall the location there and its kind of a hog .:back, you hit
the top of the hog back and the water splits and goes both ways, is that
right?
Group Present: Thats right
9
Mr. Wagner: There is a little ridge that runs down the north side about the center
of it and one goes to the east and the other goes back to the west
toward the lake.
Mr. Shultz: Well I feel that at this time, and the Board does too, I'm sure
that if you people can arbitrate the acerage that you (figure of
15 acres) now is that agreeable to you people, you other landowners in
the area?
Edmond Greip: It is satisfactory with me with that figure to get things going.
Glen Brooking: I would be satisfied with that.
Louis Bein: This would be satisfactory with me.
Charles Lucas: I would be satisfied with this, it seems to be the only piece of
land mine sets up here in the corner, mine is farther away than
Johns, probably there is less of my land draining into this than
Johns, but I am willing to go along with it.
Mr. Shultz:
Well as I understand that was all that was in the way to getting
this thing - district - set up without an election, is that correct
Councelor?
Mr. Bein: We had contacted everyone in the district knowing John was going to
be against this thing and we had three people who said if John
Wagner will sign this thing we will too. Now as long as we have gone
this far with it, I would hate to try and go back and gather these
signatures up, but I don't think we can get them anymore, I think
it will have to be an election.
You think it will have to come to an election.
Mr. Shultz:
Mr. Bein:
We have wasted two years on this, a lot of people have changed and
have moved
10
Mr. Ewing:
Mr. Being
Mr. Ewing:
Mr. Seine
Mr. Shultz:
Mr. Good:
Mr. Wagner:
Mr. Good:
If Mr. Wagner agrees to the 15 acres will that necessitate an election?
Well we would have to go back out and get new signatures from all these
people in the area and I don't know if we could get them or not.
In other words they have signed on the basis that he was goint to
put in 53.4 acres in its entirety.
This thing has been rocking along for two years, in that time we put
in a lot of work and effort, and we have gone this far with the election.
I would just as soon see the election.
What are your feelings Mr. Counselor?
May I clarify one point, do I understand that the 15 acres is to take
care of tract 22 alone and then tract 21 will remain the same and all
other tracts in the district will be as we presented them here on this
map.
I didn't hear
I am sorry, John, I understand that the 15 acres that we have determined
on will knock tract 22 of 53.4 acres orginally down to that figure, to
the 15 acres, that all other tract indicated in the district will stand
orginally proposed. Now with respect to the election, I feel that it
would be to the benefit of the district to go ahead with the election
procddure at this time. We have expended between one and two hundred
dollies on the publication to this point I would hesitate to go ahead
and attempt to get all the signature again on another petition which
would entail drawing a new petition. The contents of the petition
has to be different on the voluntary basis, than does the contents
of a petition going through an election. We did have it on that
base but circumstances have changed it would require an entirely new
draft, I think perhaps that the effort and the expense involved from
11
point on would be comparable to going the other route. We might
as well pursue this one at this point.
Mr. Shultz: Well it appears no it would be up to you folks to go ahead and
advertise and get your election set up.
Attorney:
There is one thing that needs to be clarified and that is to outline
the boundaries, that we have set up in the petition, if we are going
to draw back from 53.4, we will have to have some determination made,
as to what 15 acres out of this 53.4 will be included to adjust and the
papers that I have drafted here today I left an allowance for inclusion
or exclusion of land so that we can use our orginal boundaries as
they stand and just exclude out a certain area and if we could have
a determination as to what area is excluded we can go ahead with all
the papers, that we have already prepared for the Board of County
Commissioners.
Mr. Shultz: I believe that would be up to Mr. Wagner and his neighbors to kind of
sketch that out.
Mr. Goods I suggest that perhaps that we could simply designate the west 15 acres
particular tract, as being included and excluded the easterly 35 or 38
acres or the difference which would be the easiest way to designate
and also to hold the description down.
Attorneys It make no difference to me, but I would rather have it where it
actually slopes through. Would this be ( shows Mr. Wagner the map)
say the top 15 acres.
Mr Wagner: If you want to do it that way, lest say the top of the knowl, the
ditch comes out here, this ditch runs down her, but there is 6 acres
here under irrigation not pump land, all goes toward the lake, then
this strip right here. It wouldn't be a straight 15 acres.
12
Attorney:
Well we could take the north 6 acres and then take the rest on the
west side of the road. This is up to the top of the hill. What we
are going to do is to take the boundaries as now proposed and exclude
from the district all the land except the north 6 acres of this tract
22 and actually if we described it would be the west 9 acres out of the
tract below that 6 acres. Would this be agreeable to you.
Mr. Wagner: Yes.
Attorney: Would this be agreeable to the Board
Mr. Shultz: It would be acceptable to the Board.
Attorney: Otherwise we would have to have a survey to go out and get a rectangular
tract there.
Mr. Shultz: Now it is a matter of advertising it for an election is that correct?
Attorney: Well sir, there is an order to be entered - this is the order for the
Establishment of the Proposed District and for your Boards information,
this is provided by Statute 47-1-9. These are the copies we have
prepared here, and there is a further order by the Board required by
Statute 47-1-11 which we have prepared. Now I don't know if these
are in the exact forms that the Board generally uses if they are
not they can use the foremat. The other one is the notice of election
for proposed Newell Lake Drainage District and this has to be published.
Mr. Good: We are back to the same old quandry whether the same two weeks means
two publication one a week or three publication one at the beginning
and one at the end and one in the middle. If this would be okay could
we discuss it with the petitioners
Mr. Shultz: That is your perrogative.
13
Attorney That is al we have right now unless you would like to determine
now the date the election will be. Now that is kind of contingent
upon whether we puslish 2 or 3 times. Do you want to go through
this publication again Mr. Bein?
Mr. Bein: No but I think we could allow three weeks, to make up your mind to
see if you want tow or three.
THE FOLLOWING WAS STATED TO CLARIFY WHY4THE ARTICLE WAS PUBLISHED
IN WELD COUNTY, COLORADO
Attorney: We would have published the article in Berthoud, except that statute
Mr. Shultz:
requires that it be published in a newspaper that is actually published
in the County of Weld and this kept us from publishing it in the
Berthoud paper or we would have. There was certainly no intent
to not inform anyone, it was just strictly that the statute requires
that it be published in Weld County. We even discussed the possiblity'
of publishing over there, only the statutes say otherwise. It gets
to the point where it is quite expensive.
I believe as far as this board is concerned, we would leave the
election date with you people - whatever you decide.
Attorney: Why don't we set it for , the place of the elction is set forth
in the notice that I prepared and the election will include only
those persons who own land within the area and there are certain
other qulaifications that are set forth in the notice and we are
required to set the polling place which we have designated as the
Little Thompson Grange Building, Weld County, Colorado, The
names of the judges we have set are: Mrs. Bein, Mrs. Lucas and
Mrs. Showalter. The two alternates are: Mrs. Cook and Mrs. Pennecock.
We have also proposed or listed three persons who would be eligible for
directors as required by the statute and these three persons are the
Attorney:
Mr. Shultz:
Attorney:
Mr. Shultz:
14
same as the petitioners on the petition and the only blank that
is left open for the signature of the Chairman of the Board of
County Commissioners, County Clerk and the seal and also the date
for the election. Is there any particular day of the week on which
to hold the election?
THE DAY SET FORTH BY THE ?GROUP WAS TO BE A WEDNESDAY
Mr. Good: Then that would make it the 24th of June, let see this is the 27th
we could hardly get in three weeks before the 17th, we would have to
set it one more week behind, which would make it the 24th of June
if it is agreeable
Then by statute on the second -Monday following the election the Board
of County Commissioners is supposed to meet and approve the vote
(Statute 47-1-17) on the canvassing of the vote by the County
Commissioners.
Then after the election that definitely establishes your district,
is that correct?
Yes sir, then we file this of record and the Board of Directors
are designated at the election.
Meeting adjourned.
Hello