West Paradox Watershed Application for P.L. 566 Project (3)

Home Browse Search

ar forth all the requirements. A question arose as to whether or not those holding mineral claims would sign the petition for or against the district. Since the statute provides that owners of lands other than irrigated land must have an assessed valuation of at least $1000, it would appear that this would eliminate most of those owning mineral claims. 2. Amendment of the Articles of Incorporation of the Paradox Valley Canal and Reservoir Company - Under this approach, the articles would be amended to include all lands below Buckeye Reser- voir which would benefit from the project. As can readily be seen, if this were accomplished, then the Paradox Valley Canal and Reser- voir Company would act as the sole sponsor for the project as it would control all areas where work is to be done. This approach seemed to meet with considerable opposition because of the history of how these articles were originally drafted. In other words, there was a great hesitancy on the part of those present to in any way amend the articles of incorporation of said company. 3. Formation of Nonprofit Corporations to Qualify as Co- sponsors - If this approach is adopted, the Paradox Valley Canal and Reservoir Company would act as the sponsor of the project and nonprofit corporations would act as co- sponsors. Those ditches that are now individually owned or owned as partnerships would have to form mutual ditch companies or some other type of nonprofit corpora- tion to qualify as co- sponsors. It should be pointed out that it is not now known what work will have to be accomplished on ditches and ditch heads. This will be determined at a later date. It may be the case that on some ditches no work will have to be done in order to follow the work plan. In discussing these matters, it was a consensus of opinion that this was probably the simplest and most desirable approach. DHH : lk Memo -2- November 23, 1964