CBT/WG Water Sharing Report - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

There are certain advantages to this procedure. It serves the goal of uniformity, and thus avoids the danger that parties would feel they had received less beneficial terms than other parties entering into similar contracts. The burden on potential buyers and sellers would be reduced because the District would take on the task of drawing up contract terms; once those terms were developed, potential buyers and sellers would have only to decide if they were acceptable. Those who accepted the standard arrangement would then determine the price to be paid. District consideration and approval of contracts would be simplified. However, this approach would place a heavy burden on the District board and staff in developing the contract terms. It would be difficult if not impossible for the District to anticipate and address, through a standard agreement developed in advance, the various situations which might be presented by individual contracting parties. For the sake of uniformity, the District could be forced to impose arbitrary terms as to some provisions, even where a degree of variation might be acceptable and could better meet the needs of the parties. Another difficulty with formulating a standard agreement in advance is determining who should be given a voice in representing the interests of buyers and sellers as contract terms are developed by the District. Drawing up a standard contract based on general comment rather than on the positions of parties actually interested in contracting would tend to skew the resulting terms. Similarly, allowing parties who currently have no direct stake in the contracts the same degree of influence in developing contract terms as those who would be more immediately bound by them could impose unfair burdens on the latter group. Also, as new buyers and sellers become interested in interruptible agreements in the future, the form contract would likely come to be seen as outdated or otherwise unsatisfactory and would have to be revised. This would impose an additional burden on the District and would undermine the goal of uniformity in contract provisions which is one of the primary advantages of this approach. District acting as intermediary to control negotiation process Under this scenario, prospective buyers and sellers would negotiate terms with the District acting as intermediary. All buyers would act jointly, as would all sellers, and all resulting contracts would contain the same terms. Like the first approach, this method would achieve uniformity in contract terms, avoiding a situation of some parties feeling they had received a less advantageous deal than others, and simplifying the process of review and approval of contracts by the District's board of directors. Another advantage is that the District retains some control over the contracting process. District board and, staff members will be aware of what is occurring in regard to negotiations and contracts involving C-BT water. The District will be able to ensure that all contract terms meet with its approval rather than limiting its role to certain fundamental requirements with which all agreements must comply. 18