PROJC01779 (2) - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

duties to other; 3) this agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of Colorado in the event of legal action arising from, or related to, this agreement, venue, and Mesa County District Court jurisdiction; 4) a clause binding and benefiting their heirs, successors, personal representatives and assigns; and 5) a clause warranting that paid manager Jim Rooks and elected director Herman Beard have authority to sign and bind each entity. Comment: Does the clause binding and benefiting their heirs, successors, personal representatives and assigns mean that aMID taxpayers are bound by this agreement? The second October 29 resolution: 1) appoints Della Grimes, an OMID salaried clerk, Secretary of MMLE; 2) authorizes Jim Rooks to sign contractor agree- ments; 3) authorizes MMLE to borrow funds from OMID for a certificate of de- posit; 4) authorizes MMLE to enter into a security agreement, pledging MMLE revenues in accordance with the loan contract with CWCB; 5) authorizes MMLE to establish a reserve debt service fund; and 6) directs Jim Rooks to set rates and fees to be collected from OMID; 7) authorizes MMLE to place revenues de- rived in a special account; and 8) authorizes MML to repay the CWCS loan. Comment: Records have not been found documenting what the service is that MMLE will provide OMID. October 29, 1996 NRSC District Conservationist Jeff Burwell and Herman Beard OMID Board president signed a project status review stating therein that OMID had control of the land MML serves. October 30, 1996 MMLE entered a security agreement with CWCB making the State beneficiary of the revenues it derives from fees or charges collected from OMID. During a meeting chaired by State of Colorado Soil Conservation District em- ployee Carl Zimmerman, at OMID headquarters, on October 31, 1996, manager Rooks stated that two board members had solicited votes from water users on MML to assure passage of OMID's loan request at the 1996 annual meeting. Attorney Bill Frey restated that because OMID is a private business, the District is not subject Amendment 1. Mr. Frey additionally stated that because the 1921 Irrigation District Law does not stipulate how a private business votes on capital projects, he had opined that all persons served by MML were eligible to vote. When asked if the staff had solicited votes, Mel Rettig replied that was he and Director Clark, not the staff that had solicited votes. When asked if an elected official soliciting votes was considered ex parte, he replied that he didn't know what that term meant. 9