West Paradox Watershed Application for P.L. 566 Project ‎(4)‎

• Description: Paradox Valley - PL 566
• State: CO
• Basin: Gunnison
• Water Division: 4
• Date: 7/7/1964
• Author: Donald H. Hamburg, CWCB
• Title: West Paradox Watershed Application for P.L. 566 Project
• Water Supply Pro - Doc Type: Board Memo

capacity to fulfill their rights under the Articles
of Incorporation?
The question is answered in the negative.
The Articles of Incorporation provide, in Article 7,
that neither Class I stock nor Class II stock shall vote or be
assessed for enlargements or extensions of the "irrigation
system" nor shall they "have any right therein ". As the
"irrigation system" is described in Articles 2 and 3, the
Buckeye Reservoir is included in the definition. Therefore, Class
I and Class II stockholders would have no right in the enlargement
of the reservoir.
Your second question is as follows:
What are the rights of Class III stockholders?
The rights of Class III stockholders are set forth in Article 5.C.
If the water supply is such that it can only fulfill the rights
of Class I stockholders, then Class III receives no water. If
there is sufficient water supply, the holders of Class III stock
will receive one acre -foot of water per share. How it can be
determined that the Class I stockholders will receive their
water and, consequently, the Class III rights are fulfilled, I
cannot say. I would imagine that some educated guess is made
and water delivered accordingly. The Articles are also not clear
as to how many shares of Class III stock have been issued.
Your third question is as follows:
Do we need a new quasi - municipal corporation so as
to contract with the federal government?
As you know, the Regional Attorney for the U.S.D.A. has approved
the Paradox Valley Canal and Reservoir Company as a sponsoring
agency for the project. I can see no reason why a quasi- munici-
pal corporation (conservancy district) should be formed to
contract for the project. The Articles also provide that the
company has authority to contract with the federal government.
There is a requirement under P. L. 566,.as you know,
that at least one -half the land in the watershed must be under
land treatment when the project is an irrigation project. I
talked to the S.C.S. personnel about this matter, and they in-
formed me that there was no need to form a district for this as
the Soil Conservation Districts already formed will take care of
this.
Memo -3- July 7,7.1964