Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.0 Correspondence" cc: %Mr. Henry Kane 'Mr. Tom Preston Mr. Bob Emerson Mr. Jerry Raisch • FOSTER PETROLEUM CORPORATION 242 MAIN STREET CARBONDALE.. COLORADO 81623 303-963-3200 July 10, 1981 NOTE: Same letter individually typed to each commissioner Mr. Larry Velasquez Garfield County Commissioner P. 0. Box 640 Glenwood Springs, CO 81623 Dear Mr. Velasquez: During the Commission Meeting on Monday, July 6, 1981, Foster Petroleum Corporation's final plat for Lake Springs Ranch was referred to the P & Z by Commission vote. There- after discussion turned to the Sanitation District and sanitation service for the PUD. At that time you requested that I submit a cost analysis covering annexation to the District versus a new district with separate sanitation facilities for Lake Springs Ranch. Foster Petroleum Corporation's general position with respect to Lake Springs Ranch development has been to follow as closely as possible guidelines set forth by the County Commissioners and the County Planning Office. We have attempted, for instance, to structure our development and sales program so that no hidden costs were passed on to the ultimate buyers of property in Lake Springs Ranch. Naturally, we pursued with County recommendation a formation of a district for sanitation service with Los Amigos Development and Colorado Mountain College. We agreed, ,atthat atimlfefwith the Mor. Rob Chatmas who was then the managing partner for Los Amigos, to pay o tional costs for the formation of the District and are still ready, willing and able to.ldso. Our understanding was that organizational costs would include one-half (1) of con- sulting fees associated with the organization of the District up to and including the annexation of Lake Springs Ranch and the annexation agreementaddition,, lgrbor th lattorneys' fees and expenses and engineering fees and expenses. f course, pay the cost of installation of outfall lines, collection lines and its pro rata share of the cost of expanding the sewage treatment facility as required. Over 12 months ago we submitted (through Bob Emerson, local attorney for Foster) an annexation request, and we still are not annexed. After some months of no activity, we began to analyze the options available to Foster to enable us to carry through with our development in the summer of 1981. Those alternatives included annexation, of course, contractual service agreement with the District, and lastly a District serving only the Lake Springs Ranch PUD. At the present time to annex to the existing ngnDistrict will carry with it the following costs, all of which are not totally public 1. Apartment levy charge - $420,000.00 - (Mr. Tom Neal has requested f$2,00000.000nper lot in the Foster Petroleum Corporation PUD to gain his app ation to the Spring Valley Sanitation District. This request was made in a telephone conversation some three days before the June 1981 District Board Meet- ing. At that time, Mr. Neal indicated to me he had sufficient funds to fight our annexation for five years if necessary. His justification for requesting $420,000.00 from Foster Petroleum Corporation was that the apartments which were Mr. Larry Velasquez _2_ July 10, 1981 built by Los Amigos had turned out to be economically unfeasible and that they were a requirement by the CMC folks for inclusion in the District. I have spoken with Mr. Rod Anderson of the College, who attended most of the meetings with Rob Chatmas and I, and Mr. Anderson has told me that under no circumstances did the College demand construction of the apartments as a contingency to District forma- tion. Frankly, it is my understanding that the apartments were plagued by bad management and cost overruns which both contributed heavily to their economic problems.) 2. Outfall. Line - $250,000.00 - (A line approximately one mile in Length will be required to carry waste and sewage from the Lake Springs Ranch PUD to a point near the Pinon Alps Apartments where we would intercept a sewer line to the sewer plant. This $250,000.00 is an engineering number and may not include the cost of blasting in the event rock out-croppings along the opposite side of County Road 1.14 from the Pinon Alps ultimately requires additional time and money.) 3. Plant Savings - $200,000.00 - (Eldorado Engineering estimates indicate that Foster Petroleum Corporation's share of upgrading existing treatment plant facil- ities to handle 210 units in the Foster PUD will cost approximately $350,000.00. Our research indicates that a 75,000 gallon plant installed and in place can be purchased for approximately $150,000.00.) 4. Total - $870,000.00 - (Paid by purchasers of lots in Lake Springs PUD that could be saved if a Lake Springs Sanitation District were allowed by the County and State.) As you will recall, at the close of the Foster Petroleum Corporation presentation, I requested that the County attempt to define more accurately the terns "when feasible" as used in the County Master Plan with respect to consolidation of sanitation facil- ities. I hereby reiterate that request. T.n this particular set of circumstances, we feel that we are in a "Catch 22" position between the County, State and a District which is now in private hands and under private control and being manipulated for private benefit. We do not want to take advantage of our neighbors or of other people in the County; we wish to pay our own way and we are planning so that our development will not be a burden on existing taxpayers. We would like to be able to proceed with our development without further delays and in a manner that will minimize the cost to the members of the public who will purchase lots in our development. However, the way out of this "Catch 22" is not clear to me at this time, and 1 am requesting, as I did in Monday's meeting, that you advise us as to how to proceed to solve the problem which is beginning to tol- more and more money in terms of losses every day that goes by that we cannot develop the subject property. I will be more than happy, as will our attorneys, to meet you at anytime, anywhere to bring this rather unique problem to an end. I am looking forward to a response in the near future. \ Sincerely, tt �C ' ✓Y Gr 'Luncan L. Sinnock Real Estate Investment Manager DLS:jc Enclosure LOYAL E. LE.AVFNWORTH KEVIN L. PATRICK . JAMES.S.. LOCHHEAD L.IWPATRICK LOCHHEP, P.C. ✓NORTH, & ATTORNEYS A'r LAW. November 4, 1980 1011 GRAND AVENUE P.O. DRAWE1t 2030 GLENWOOD SPRINGS. COLORADO 81601 TELEPHONE: 1303) 943.2261 Robert B. Emerson, Esq. Attorney at Law 303 Main Street Carbondale, CO 81623 Re: Spring Valley Sanitation District Agreement With Foster Petroleum Corporation Dear Bob: Enclosed for your client's review is an Agreement providing for contractual wastewater treatment service for the Lake Springs Ranch development. The Agreement further provides for the eventual annexation of the subject property to the District. The Agreement is in draft form, has not been submitted to the Board of Directors of the District for their approval; as such it should be construed soley as a draft proposal to initiate negotiations. Additionally, it is our intention to add an additional section within the Agreement which provides that annexation shall not occur prior to June 1981. In the interests of expediency, the Agreement is coming to you without this information. I apologize for the delay in getting this to you, but please feel free to call if you have any questions. Very truly yours, LEAVENWORTFI, PATRICK & LOCHHEAD, P. C. Key n L. Patrick KLP/ Enc. cc: Mr. Dean K. Moffatt (w/enc.) Ib Duncan Sinnock From: Bob E1nerson Date: August 14, 1981 At your request, I have prepared a chronology of events regarding Foster Petroleum Corporation's request for annexation into the Spring Valley Sanitation District. Some of these events are documented by copies of letters and agreements. Other events are based on my recollection and file notes. 1. The Spring Valley Sanitation District was approved by the Garfield County Connisioners in January of 1980. Prior to that time, Foster Pc'roleum Corporation participated in numerous meetings and conferen s concerning the establishment of the District. 2. After the formation of the District, I had several meetings and telephone conversations with Lee Leavenworth, the attorneyto representing the District. The purpose of our conversations was begin the annexation process on behalf of Foster Petroleum Corporation. Exhibit A is a copy of a letter dated June 12, 1980, that I sent to Mr. Leavenworth providing him infotmation requested concerning the preparation of a petition for annexation. 3. On June 30, 1980, I sent a letter to Dean Moffatt, the Chairman of the Board of Directors of the District. I wrote him directly because I had been advised that Mr. Leavenworth no longer represented the District. I sent Mr. Moffatt a petition for annexation by Foster Petroleum Corporation, together with necessary documents to process the petition. I had not enclosed the boundary map listed in my letter as I did not have it at the time the letter was sent. A copy of this letter is attached as Exhibit B. 4. I wrote Moffatt again on July 15, 1980, and a copy of my letter is attached as Exhibit C. 5. On July 17, 1980, Moffatt wrote me to advise me that thema Brad p had still not been received. Shortly thereafter, I personally delithe map to his office. A copy of Moffatt's letter is attached as Exhibit D. 6. Moffatt advised me that the petition given to him did not bear the original signature of Foster Petroleum Corporation's officers. oOn August 6, 1980, I sent Moffatt the original petition. A copy of cover letter is attached as Exhibit E. annexa 7. On November 4, 19B0, Leavenwo �thhsrtsent me a draft cover letter ofan draft tae agreement. A copy of attached as Exhibits F and G. 8. On December 23, 1980, I wrote Leavenworth requesting additional information concerning the District. A copy of my letter is attached as Exhibit H. 9. On December 31, 1980, Leavenworth sent me some information requested. A copy of his letter is attached as Exhibit I. 10. On February 9, 1981, I sent a letter to Leavenworth expressing Foster Petroleum's comments concerning Leavenworth's draft ofthe annexation agreement. I also sent him, with that letter, my redraft of: the annexation agreement. Copies of my letter and redraft are attached as Exhibit J and K. 11. On February 17, 1981, Leavenworth and I had a lengthy telephone conversation concerning annexation. During that conversation, he advised me that the organizational costs of the District were being computed by an accounting firm and would be availabloe the n sDeveral weeks. Leavenworth advised me theedatheg`1Fostelar rePetgoieum's request would be h_ld on March 3, 1981, a9 4 . t or annexation would be placed on the agenda and that a Foster Petroleum representative could be present. 12. The Spring Valley Sanitation District meeting was held on March 3, 1981, in Leavenworth's office. I attended the meeting on behalf of Foster, and advised the Board that Foster was anxious to complete the annexation process. No formal action was taken by the Board concerning Foster's petition for annexation or my presentation. A copy of the agenda of this meeting and the minutes of the meeting are attached as Exhibit L and M. 13. As indicated in the minutes of the meeting, Foster retained the services of Jerry Raisch, Attorney at Law, to represent Foster in connection with the annexation process. The Sanitation District hired Alan Friedman, Attorney at Law, to represent the District as general counsel. On May 11, 1981, Raisch sent Friedman a letter including an outline of issues in connection with the Foster annexation request. A copy of this letter is attached as Exhibit N. 14. On June 10, 1981, the Sanitation District held a special meeting. At this meeting, Raisch again presented Foster's request that its petition for annexation be acted on promptly by the District. 15. On July 8, 1981, Raisch sent Friedman another draft of the annexation agreement which Raisch had prepared. A copy of this letter and the draft of the agreement are attached as Exhibits 0 and P. If you have any questions concerning the information or documents contained herein, please contact me at your convenience. EXHIBIT A June 12, 1930 Leavenworth At-torncy at Law Mu::ick., Williamson, Schwartz, '',eavenworth .. Cope, P.C. P. 0. Drawer 2030 Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 Re: Foster. Petroleum Lake Springs Ranch -Spring Valley Sanitation District Dear Lee: We recently discussed the process of annexation of the Lake Springs Ranch property into the Spriric, Valley Sanitation District. The inforr.a.tion you requested is as follows: The current_ persons residing on the property are Chris Saunders inn,. Car] on 'ha.n . 2. Foster Petroleum does. not expect to have any units hooked into the :syster, in 1980 and anticipates needing approximately A0 }gook -ups in 1981. 3. There are 210 lots in the proposed subdivision that will utilize the services of the district. 4. Attached to this letter is a legal description of the property. 5. The status of subdivision approval from the County is that preliminary subdivision approval has been obtained from the County for Phase I. It is my understanding that you will prepare the petition for annexation and annexation agreement. These will be forwarded to me in draft form for my review and input. Sincerely, Robert B. Emerson RBE/jc (Dictated but not proofread by PEE before mailing.) EXHIBIT B < Jung 30, 192;. :.:r. Doan offatt 1115` (;rand Avenue :len'•;o0,', Springs, Colorado 01601 Spring Valley Sanitation District - Foster Petroleum J Corporation ,.ear Dean: t i con_ -t with Lee L,�,��:���nr;or�, concerning I hast been in contact � ri.e : Ranch now desires Fos ter Ply ,n ::-1 t i 03 _ LakeL`� adsires o Petroleum the S �'in' District. Foster , Spring valley Sanitation nn�xation into the annex into the n t ion for a, me t>r,�:!_iL in , a :c,�i � Lee has now Dist h., �.�o,, h b�. u n,JerstanC; i.,g that District. �ricc ::o � � rosin10 d 'ct`i the j�l_tit_7 1ct'J attorney. herewith the following documents I unclose+ -ion for annexation 1. Petition :Lake epyo roster Petroleum Cordo -at Sanitation <• •,,.zn,��i into the Sprint Valley o - Lake Apr -roc;-' District. 2. Notice Form. to Order for tizc iioar.c: of Directors to sign and copy 3• Court. be filed with t�1�' a � ��� for the boundary of the arca proposed of F; tna�, showing the boundary • the District and th inclusion property to said property tiz,�t is contiguous with the boundary of [ 3 :property. the District' ;pies of all r� xeciate it if you would send me co. I would appreciate in effect. also, charge, if any, for filing the Petition. rules and regulations of the District currently Please notify me of theJ approximately 30 clays should be set in not days The date for hearing published three times mthe n notard would hence, since notice might he if period. I would appreciate it than a 14 -day P the notice and set a date and Place for the hearing, itxisunuhlished in the to me, and I will seg published meeting of proper it hearing can be held at a special proper fashion. The h- Mr. Dean K. Moffatt Mune 30, 1940 Page Two the directors. A special meeting may be called by any tmm�eardof the Board by informing the other members of the date, place of the special meeting and the purpose for which it is called, and by posting notice of the meeting in at least three public places within the limits of the District and one notice must be posted in the Garfield County Courthouse. For your use, I have prepared a Notice of Special Meeting Form that may be used. The notices must be posted at least three days prior to the date of the special meeting. If you have any auestions concerning this matter, please contact me immediately. Sincerely, ROBERT B. EMERSON, P.C. T3v RISE/sed Enclosures bcc: Tom Preston Duncan Sinnock Robert B. Emerson EXHIBIT C July 15, 1980 h!r. Dean R. =ioffatt 13151i Grand Avenue Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 'R: Spring Valley Sanitation District - Foster Petroleum Corporation Dear Dean: I wrote you on June 30, 1980 concerning Foster Petroleum's _.sire to annex into the Spring Valley Sanitation District. however, I have not heard from you concerning this matter. I would appreciate it if you would contact me in the near future to apprise me of the status of this petition. 'Thank you very much. Sincerely, Robert !;. Emerson, P.C. By RLE/sed cc: Tom Preston Duncan Sinnock Robert 2. Emerson SUNDESIGNS ARCHITECTS ARCHITECTS PLANNERS SOLAR CONSULTANTS EXHIBIT D July 17, 1980 Robert B. Emerson, Esc. 303 Mair Street Carbon,,nle, CO 31623 REF: SPRING VALLEY SANITATION DISTRICT - FOSTER PETROLEUM -Dear Bob, In response to your letter of July 15, 1960, requesting the status of the annexation petition, we still await Item 4 of your June 30, 1980 letter (copy attached). Sincerely, SVSD, BOT -4D OF DIRECTORS l 2 // / Dean K. Moffatt, Secretary Enclosure DK.M/cg 1315 GRAND AVENUE GLENWOOD SPRINGS COLORADO 81601 303, 945-2201 LAW rr ICES ROBERT B. E r,nERSON. P.C. 303 MAI, •_.I BEET C ARBON()ALE. C-'.)LORADO 0162 3 1303) B53.3700 June 30, 1980 ROBERT B EMERSON CLAIRE H GREEN ,.fpr; I BY APPOINTMENT ONLY) GLENW000 SPRINGS OFFICE VALLEY DANK R TRUST BUILDING 2400 GRANO AVENUE. ROOM 300 GLEN'NOOD SPRINGS. COLORADO 81601 (303) 845-2444 Mr. Dean K. Moffatt 1315, Grand Avenue Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601 RE: Spring Valley Sanitation District - Foster Petroleum Corporation Dear Dean: Previously I had been in contact with Lee ne LLeavenworth rth conc ming Foster y tinct Valle Sanitation District. Lee advised me es to Foster_ Petroleum Corptrat:i.oy. La}:c p annex into the gip" that he would bpetition for annexation into the ,, preparing understanding that Lee has now District. However, it is y resigned as the District's attorney. I enclose herewith the following documents: oration for annexation 1. Petition by Foster Petroleum Corp y Valle Sanitation of Lake Springs Ranch into the Spring District. 2. Notice Form. 3. Order for the Board of Directors to sign and copy to be filed with the Court. showing the boundary of the reabpropored° ffor 4. A map of inclusion within: the District a.z said property that is continuous with Gr� the bou���; t.no DiStriCt'S property. (77,4; ifyou would send me copes of all I would appreciate it Y i in esf Also, if zny, for filing the Petition. rules and regulations of the District currently please notify me of the charge, The e cat e for hearing should be set approximateiy 30 dayss s hence, since notice, might be published three � rc,ciate it if the Board would than a 14 -day period. I would appreciate for the hearing, execute the notice and set a date and p published the return it to me, and I will see that it is in meeting of proper fashion. The hearinq can be held at a special 71: .,ert. Carbondale, Colorado 131693 ,J-3700 or 963-3777 EXHIBIT E Mr. Dean Moffatt Sun•esigns Architects 1315 Grand Ave. G1enwQ(ks Colorqdo 81601, August 6, 1980 111.S1.:\111.\( ; T (1 lO 1 copy n/• letter from Agreemem 1' lu r t.r TRANSMITTAL LETTE( 1(1.:(;.11(111.\(;: 1 1 Spring Valley Sanitation District - Foster Petroleum Plat (:(port 1'Irctrling�s Original Petition from Foster Petroleum Corporation 11 LSI.: I H1•:.s1..\-7' TO For 1'uttr information. For your rerietc and comment. For your nl)ltrnrul, etalursrmc'nl nail return to me. For filing; in vnnr njjirr. Per your request \1.:11: Foster is the owner of the tract of land set forth above which will he referred to in this Agreement as Lake Springs Ranch or the " ro1D rty . 1(0 Al I II -A'.' -N' (1811 tit YIN I I':1 I F I( ) . IA.\Ikti\ l 0( H111 -AI) I.A`....O mil i, I'ATRI(:K 10C 1 {I {I.AI�, A l l ORNIAS A l l A\l November 4, 1980 EXHIBIT F 1011 (,RANI) A\'I tilIt 1' U. I'RAAY'FR 2010 (.1 FN')'l)UI) 11'RIti(.S, (('f ORAI)O 81(.01 Ii I FPVIONF 11011 94S-2261 Robert I'). Srnersun, Attorney at Law 303 Main Street Carbondale, CO Re: 'bring Valley Sanitation District Agreement with i-ast.er Pefre,]eum Corporation Dear :ob: l;nclosed for your client's review is an Agreement providing for contractual wastewater treatment service for the Lake Springs Ranch development. The Agreement further provides for the eventual annexation of the subject property to the District. The Agreement is in draft form, has not been submitted to the Board of Directors of the District for their approval; as such it should be construed soley as a draft proposal to initiate negotiations. Additionally, it is our intention to add an additional section within the Agreement which provides that annexation shall not occur prior to June 1981. In the interests of expediency, the Agreement is coming Lo you without this information. I apologize for the delay in getting this to you, but please feel tree to mill if you have any questions. Very truly yours, 1.LAVEI'1VIORTH , PATRICK & L0000EAD , P. C. Kevin L. Patrick KLP/ Enc cc: Mr. Dean K. Moffatt (w/enc.) Foster is the owner of the tract of land set forth above which will be referred to in this Agreement as Lake Springs Ranch or the 'i'roper y. DRAFT 11 /0i, % 8(1 EXIIIBIT 0 AGREEMENT RELATING '10 THE ANNEXATION OF 1'03138 1)1;'1'ROI,EUM 1,AICE 5I'R1005 RA11(.;N L)80 , _- — �'I{ 15 AGREEMENT, Made this day �) between SPRING VALLEY SANITATION DISTRICT (hereinafter referred t0 as "District") , water and sanitation district organized c 7 3 , 32-4-101 , et. seq . , and FOSTER PETROLEUM pursuant to C . R . S . 1 "Foster") an Oklahoma N(hereinafter referred to a��- corporation licensed Lo do business in the State of Colorado. 5 1 1' 0 0 .5 5 0 T H: The District and Foster have, between them, a community of interests with respect to the Lake Springs Ranch property Springs nc : Ranch") , more specifically defined as (hereafter "Lake ` { � follows: A parcel of 1 and described els Lots Five �,) of `action 'Thi rty--Two (5) and 1,i;; ( �, Nine (`1) , (32) ; Lots Seven (7) , Eight (8) , Ten (1C))ev Eleven (11), Twelve (12), Fifteen Thirteen) (13), Fourteen (1� ), (1 5) , Hixteen (16) , Seventeen (17) , Twenty 1•,f _,n Ly -0 ' (21), Twenty -To (22) , (2C)) Northeast '1"wanly-Eight (28), and the , Quarter of the Southeast Quarter (NI SE1 ) of • ,ec l ion 'Thirty -Three (57)); and the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter (SWS6^J.:) of Section Thirty -Four (34) all (0)South, Range in Township Six West of the SixthEighty-Eight (88 ) Principal Meridian. Also Lots Two (2) , Three (3), and Nine (9) of Section Four (4) , Township Seven (7) South, Range Eighty-hight (88) West of the Sixth Principal Meridian, County of Garfield, State of Colorado. An arrnexai ion petition tion has been filed with the District by the owners of 10W/, of the property described above, seeking the approximateacre of land into the District. arsnexatorl of apt Foster is the owner of the tract, of laid set, forth above which will be referred to in this Agreement as Lake Springs Ranch the "Property." to The District and Foster deem it advisable and advantageous an agreement to specifically set forth join in and execute the conditions upon which the shall occur into the District pursuant to C.R.S. 1973, Sec. 34-4-122(1)(a)• The District and Foster mutually acknowledge and agree that the conditions hereinafter set forth are reasonable conditions and recge ernents to be imposed by the District in connection with the and favorable action on Foster's petition such annexation of Lake Springs Ranch acceptance for ,annexation; the District recognizing and reciting that conditions are necessary Lo protect, promote, and enhance the public welfare. IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED that the District is entitled to assurance that the matters hereinafter agreed upon will be performed as agreed by Foster or its successors and assigns. IT IS FURTHER MUTUALLY AGREED that annexation of the Lake of this Agreement Springs Ranch property and the of certain utility service to the Property provisions relating to provision are essential to the Agreement between the parties. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing mutual covenants contained herein and the previously filed petition for annexation, IT IS AGREED AS FOLLOWS: Section 1 Scope of this Agreement This Agreement is intended to set forth the parties' understanding and .agreement as to the annexation of Lake Springs Ranch property into the Spring Valley Sanitation District; as to the proportionate share of monies to be paid by the parties concerning operation and maintenance of the District; as to the amount of monies to be charged for individual tap fees; as to the responsibility of costs incurred in extending sewer services from the Lake Springs Ranch property to the existing plant; and as to the proportionate share of attorneys' fees and engineering fees to be paid by the parties. Section 2 Initial Fees Incurred The cost to the District as of November 1, 1980, has been approxin, ely S for the organization of this District Foster will pay to the District within thirty (30) daydaye execution of this Agreement, one-half (1/2) of the organizational fees incurred in the organization of the District. This number is not to be set off against any other monetary requirements that appear below in this Agreement. Section 3 Construction of Wastewater Facilities A. Foster will construct and pay the costs of all sewer lines and facilities within Lake Springs Ranch for the collection of wastewater and for all sewer lines and facilities necessary for the conveyance of wastewater from the Lake Springs Ranch property to the present District plant site. B. The District (including Lake Springs Ranch annexation) will be responsible for construction of all facilities necessary to treat and dispose of wastewater. C. The District's engineers, at Foster's expense, shall inspect and approve all facilities constructed by Foster. Upon final approval, Foster shall dedicate to the District all such facilities, including necessary easements, as the District, in its sole discretion, may desire. Section 4 Operation and Maintenance of Wastewater Facilities A. All facilities shall be operated and maintained by the District. B. peration and maintenance expenses of all District facilities are the responsibility of the District (including Lake Springs Ranch annexation). -3- Section 5 Prohibited Sewage Under the terms of this Agreement, each participating party shall be prohibited from discharging into the system any gasoline, oils, greases, or other toxic substances which cannot be treated by the sewage treatment facilities. The parties recognize that the District shall from time to time enact Rules and Regulations for the District; Foster agrees that it shall fully adhere to said Rules and Regulations. Section 6 Tap Fees and Service Charges Users within the Lake Springs Ranch property shall pay tap fees and service charges as shall be established by the District from time to time. Section 7 Consulting Fees A. Foster shall pay one-half (1/2) of all consulting fees associated with the organization of the District up to and including the annexation of Lake Springs Ranch and the annexation agreement. This shall include both attorneys' fees and expenses and engineering fees and expenses. B. In addition, Foster shall submit within thirty (30) days of the signing of this Agreement 520,000.00 to the District to cover in-house. attorney and engineering review for the the annexation of the property and the granting of the petition. Section 8 Plans and Specifications Review All plans and specificatons are subject to District review and approval, at Foster's sole cost. -4- Section 9 Service Plan Revision Foster shall pay all costs incurred in revising the service plan, or amending the service plan for approval by the proper county officials. Costs shall include, but not be limited to, both legal and engineering costs. Section 10 Present Operational Costs Foster agrees to advance, on the same terms and conditions as otherE on a proportionate basis (based on percentage of assigned n.ilt:iimate EQR) the day to day costs incurred by the District from the time of this Agreement until such time as the District has generated its own operating funds. Section 11 Miscellaneous Covenants A. The District shall establish and enforce rules and regulations concerning the use of the system by all customers and all users. Further, the District shall establish standby charges, service charges, and plan investment fee charges as the District deems necessary for its operation. B. The District shall at all times operate the entire joint system properly and in an economical manner, making repairs and r, -placements to assume the continuous operation of the system. The District shall at all times operate the system to the b'st of its ability in conformance with all federal, state, ,:,1<1 local statutes and regulations applicable to such facilities. C. The District will promptly reconstruct any facilities which are destroyed and for which insurance proceeds are received. D. There shall be no competing private systems constructed within the boundaries of- the District, including the Lake Springs Ranch property, and all residential, commercial, industrial, and municipal structures wherein wastewater is produced therefrom shall be connected to the District's facilities. E. The parties to this Agreement acknowledge that this Agreement constitutes full agreement between them and that neither parties rely upon any oral representation made by a party or an agent or officer of a party. F. It is understood and agreed that this Agreement shall be iin full force and effect until terminated by mutual agreement by the parties hereto or as provided by law. The effective date of this Agreement shall be the day of , 1980, and this Agreement shall be binding upon the successors and assigns of the parties hereto. Section 12 Colorado Law - Modification This Agreement is made and delivered within the State of Colora( and the laws of the State of Colorado shall govern its int.rpretation, validity, and enforceability. This Agreement shall not be varied or terminated except by the written agreement of both parties. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties of this Agreement have executed this Agreement as of the date and year first above written. ATTEST: Secretary SPRING VALLEY SANITATION DISTRICT By -6- President ATTEST: :retary FOSTER PETROLEUM CORPORATION By APPROVED AS TO FORM AND SUBSTANCE: LEAVENWORTH, PATRICK ELOHHEAD,District for the Spring Valley Sanitation By ROBERT EMERSON for Foster Petroleum Corporation STATE OF COLORADO ss. County of The foregoing instrument was subscribed and sworn 198oObefore Rte this day of9, of Spring Valley Sanitation District. Witness my hand and Official Seal. My commission expires: Notary Public STATE OF ) ss. County of ) The foregoing instrument was subscribed and sowr 19o0 before me this day of of Foster Petroleum _ , Corporation. Witness my hand and Official Seal. My commis.siort expires: Notary Public EXHIBIT H December 23, 1980 Mr. Lee Leavenworth Attorney at Law 1011 Grand Avenue Glenwood Springs, CO 31601 Re: Spring Valley Sanitation District Dear Lee: So that our file is complete, I would appreciate it if you would forward me copies of the following documents: By -Laws of the District. 2. All contracts creating obligations on the part of the District. 3. Minutes of all Board meetings. In addition to these documents, Foster Petroleum would like to receive a letter from tSerDiceglA�reementnd CMC isindicating that the Sewage Treatment force and effect and that neither party is in default. Once I have received these documents, I will be back in touch with you to try to finalize the annexation agreement. Sincerely, ROBERT 13. EMERSON, P.C. RBE:det 13y: Robert B. Emerson LOYAL E.LEAVENWORTH KEVIN L. PATRICK JAMES S. LOCHHEAD LEAVENWOI?TH, PATRICK & LOCHITEAD. P C. ATTORNEYS AT LAW December 31, 1980 EXHIBIT I 1011 GRAND AVENUE P. 0 DRAWER 2030 GLENWOOD SPRINGS. COLORADO 81601 TELEPHONE (303) 945-2261 Robert B. Emerson, Esq. Robert B. EmersJn, P.C. 303 Main Street Carbondale, CO 81623 Re Spring Valley Sanitation District/Foster Petroleum Deai Bob: I received your letter of December 23. First, there are no bylaws of the District at this time. Inasmuch as the customers of the District consist solely of 48 apartment units (within the District boundaries) and the Colorado Mountain Junior College District (pursuant to contract), the Board of Directors has determined not to adopt bylaws until more customers are utilizing the services of the District. asked for copies of all contracts creating obliga- part of the District. At this time, You have tions on the include: such contracts 1. An agreement with Dalby, Wendland and Co. regarding accounting and bookkeeping services; 2. Agreements relating to liability and other insurance and bonds for the Directors; 3. An agreement with Dean Gordon (a Class D waste water operator) for operator services; 4. An agreement with Hanifen, Imhoff regarding underwrit- ing services for proposed bonds; 5. An agreement with the trict regarding the provision College. Colorado Mountain College Dis- of waste water services to the ,, rir. PATRICK & LOCIIII EAD, P. C. 1;. Emerson, Esq. `December 31, 1980 Page 2 Inasmuch as the first four agreements seemed minor in nature, I am enclosing a copy of only the agreement with the College. If you desire any of the others, feel free to contact me. The District is also negotiating with the Los Amigos Ranch Partnership. As you may be aware, the Partnership designed, installed, and paid for the Phase I improvements outlined in the Service Plan. The negotiations between the Partnership and the District will provide for the conveyance of those improve- ments to the District, the reimbursement to the Partnership for organizational costs (the source of which will include in part contributions towards organizational costs received from parties desiring to annex into the District) and reimbursement of operation and maintenance costs advanced by the Partnership to the District. I expect these negotiations to be finalized in the very near future. You have also asked for copies of minutes of all the Board meetings. Inasmuch as the District has been in existence for almost one year, I would prefer to treat your request in a different fashion. Rather than provide you with copies, the District will make available for your inspection during office hours the minutes of all board meetings to date. If you desire copies of specific minutes, we will be happy to provide them. If you want copies of all, minutes, the District must ask to be compensated for copying and handling costs. On behalf of the Spring Valley Sanitation District, we can advise you that CMC is not in default under the Sewage Treat- ment Services Agreement nor under the Agreement attached here- to. The District believes both the Agreements to be in full force and effect. Obviously, I cannot answer for CMC and would suggest that you contact them directly. On behalf of the District, we stand ready to work with you to finalize the annexation agreement. If I can be of any further assistance, feel free to contact me. LEL:jaw Encs. cc: Dean K Moffatt Very truly yours, LEAVENWORTH , PATRICK & LOCHHEAD, P.C. Loy 4 )E. Leavenworth ROBERT B EMERSON CLAIRE H. GREEN LAW OFFICES ROBERT B. EMERSON. P.C. CAR00NDALE. COLORADO 131623 (303) D63.3700 EXHIBIT J February 9, 1981 (GY APPOINTMENT ONLY) GLENWOOD SPRINGS OFFICE VALLEY DANK & TRUST BUILDING 2400 GRAND AVENUE. ROOM 300 GLENWOOD SPRINGS. COLORADO 81601 (303) 043-2444 Mr. Lee Leavenworth Patrick and Lockhead, PC - P. 0. Drawer 2030 81601 Glenwood Springs, CO Re: Spring Valley Sanitation District Foster Petroleum Corp. Dear Lee: I have reviewed the draft of the annexation agreemenitationtirictt bs between Foster Petroleum Corp. and Spring Valley dated November 4, 1980. I also have conferred with Foster's representatives concenthis adraf. The sbbstantialFdepartbrepfrom feel that the draft represents the understa_)ding and agreement that was reached at the time that Foster withdrew from the negotiations with Los Amigand and CMC. At that time, Foster agreed to and did support facilitate the Los Amigos developers in the establishment of the district. The following are my specific comments on the draft: 1. Foster agreed to equally share the organizational costs of the district as set forth in Section 2. However, we need to know the total amount and have a breakdown of the actual costs incurred. 2. Section 3(B) of the draft is not acceptable. The original agreeTent was that Los Amigos developers would ebere fully respons} le for construction and payment f Fosterhsewer development to the treatment plant. Likewise, be responsible for the same obligation with respect to Lake t Springs Ranch. The cost of constructing and improving sewer treatment facility itself was to be shared by the developers, pro rata, based on the number of units in each development. fw0L L11 •' 9, 7e2 ury 1981 3. Section 6 does not specify the amount of tap fees and service charges that may be established, and does not indicate how the revenues so generated would be used. However, the informal information that we have is that substantial tap fees would be charged to cover development costs. Foster has always understood that the developers would .,dvance their respective "front end costs for the construction and improvements of the treatment facility. Of cc.:rse, the developers would consider these costs in setting the price of lots. Payment in this fashion would prevent the establishment of an artificially high mill levy that would be ultimately born by the property purchasers. Foster is ready, willing and able to advance its portion of these costs once an acceptable annexation agreement is reached. 4. Section 7(A) seems to be a duplication of the fees referred to in Section 2. When both developers were engaged in the negotiations with CMC, Los Amigos was utilizing the engineering services of Wright -McLaughlin and Foster was utilizing the eningeering services of Eldorado Engineering exclusively. Therefore, Foster should be given a credit for the amount of money paid Eldorado for engineering services prior to the time that Eldorado became employed by the District since the information obtained at Foster's expense is being utilized by the District. 5. Section 7(13) is unacceptable. $20,000 seems to me to be a totally ridiculous figure since the actual cost of engineering and legal fees for review of the annexation and granting the petition should be nowhere near this amount. 6. I do not understand the charges referred to in Section 11(A). Clarification of the function and intent of these charge is necessary. The agreement does not include provisions for reimbursement to Foster of costs advanced in the event other users are annexed into the Sanitation District who will utilize the transmission lines to be constructed by Foster. Your letter of November 4, 1981 indicates that the annexation would not occur prior to June 1981. Foster's intention is to complete the annexation process as soon as possible. The petition was sent to Dean Moffat some time ago and little has happened since that time. Foster wishes to complete the subdivision process with the County as soon as possible, and therefore would like to complete the annexation process as soon as possible, as Foster would like to begin construction this spring. ,worth 2.u.,ry 9 , 1981 `! EXHIBIT K ANNEXATION AGREEMENT ,.1: ter' (J -U 5:Q):l THIS AGREEMENT, Made this day of ' 1981, between SPRING VALLEY SANITATION DISTRICT (hereinafter referred to as "District"), a water and sanitation district organized pursuant to C.R.S. 1973, 32-4-101, et se and FOSTER PETROLEUM CORPORATION (hereinafter referred to as "Fost r ), a Delaware corporation licensed to do business in the State of Colorado. WITNESSETH: Foster is the sole owner of the Lake Springs Ranch property (hereinafter "Lake Springs Ranch"), more specifically defined as follows: A parcel of land described as Lots Five (5) and Six (6) of Section Thirty -Two (32), Lots Seven (7) , Eight (8) , Nine (9) , ,:en (10)Eleven (11)Twelve (12),Fifteen Thirteen (13) , Fourteen (14) , Twenty (15), Sixteen (16) , Seventeen (17) , y (20), Twenty -One (21) , Twenty -Two (22) , Twenty -Eight (28), and the Northeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter (NE14SE4) of Section Thirty -Three (33); and the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter (SWSW1/4) of Section Thirty -Four (34) ll in Township Six (6) South, Range Eighty - Eight (88) West of the Sixth Principal Meridian. Also Lots Two (2) , Three (3) , and Nine (9) of Section Four (4), Township Seven (7) South, Range Eighty -Eight (88) West of the Sixth Principal Meridian, County of Garfield, State of Colorado. An annexation petition has been filed by Foster with the District by seeking the annexation of the above-described property into the District. The District and Foster deem it advisable and advantageous to join in and execute an agreement to specifically set forth the terms and conditions upon which the annexation of Lake Springs Ranch shall occur into the District pursuant to C.R.S. 1973, 34-4-122(1)(a). The District and Foster mutually acknowledge and agree that the conditions hereinafter set forth are reasonable conditions and requirements tU be imposed by the District in connection with the acceptance and favorable action on Foster's petition for annexation; the District recognizing and reciting that such conditions are necessary to protect, promote, and enhance the public welfare. IT IS MUTUALLY AGREED that the parties are entitled to assurance that the matters hereinafter agreed upon will be perfo7 ed as agreed by both parties, their successors and assigns. IT IS FURTHER MUTUALLY AGREED that annexation of the Lake Springs Ranch property and the provisions of this Agreement relating to provision of certain utility service to the Lake Springs Ranch are essential to the agreement between the parties. NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing mutual covenants contained herein and the previously filed petition for annexation, IT IS AGREED AS FOLLOWS: Section 1 Scope of this Agreement This Agreement is intended to set forth the parties' understanding and agreement as to the annexation of Lake Springs Ranch property into the Spring Valley Sanitation District; as to the proportionate share of monies to be paid by the parties concerning operation and maintenance of the District; as to the amount of monies to be charged for individual tap fees; as to the responsibility of costs incurred in extending seweij services from the Lake Sprjngs e4/j4 ay f h e 161e✓•� 01eA)-A-- -I- In4�� o 714e f uifr��-v'T` � r�rgl fh" CoSl Ranch ••- ity co le existing treatment plant; and as to DFQ�� f.,c the proportionate share of attorney's fees and engineering /1iDe fees to be paid by the parties. Section 2 Initial Fees Incurred The cost to the District as of February 1, 1981, has been approximately $ for the organization of thisDistrict. Foster will pay 1-o the District within /0000007thirty (30) days of execution of this Agreement, one-half (II) of the organizational fees incurred in the organization of the District. Foster shall receive a credit to be applied to the amount owed by Foster of $ , for engineering costs previously advanced by Foster in computation of the payment required in this paragraph. Section 3 Construction of Wastewater Facilities A. Foster will construct and pay the costs of all sewer lines and facilities within Lake Springs Ranch for the collection of wastewater and for all sewer lines and facilities necessary for the conveyance of wastewater from the Lake Springs Ranch property to the present District treatment plant site. E. Every other user within the District shall be individually responsible for construction and payment of the costs of all sewer lines and facilities within the boundaries of the Sanitation District, exclusive of Lake Springs Ranch, for the collection of wastewater and for all sewer lines and facilities necessary for conveyance of waste water from said property to the present District treatment plant site. C. The District (including Lake Springs Ranch annexation) L r- e,) r777�ti r will be responsible for construction of alf.acilities necessary to treat and dispose of wastewater. The cost of such construction shall be born on a proportionate basis by the property owners within the District based on a percentage of units approved by Garfield County and shall be paid accordingly to the schedule set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incornorated herein by this reference. D. The District's engineers, at Foster's expense, shall inspect and approve all facilities constructed by Foster. Upon final approval, Foster shall dedicate to the District all such facilities, including necessary easements, as the District, in its sole discretion, may desire. Section 4 Operation and Maintenance of Wastewater Facilities A. All facilities shall be operated and maintained by the District. B. Operation and maintenance expenses of all District facilities are the responsibility of the District (including Lake Springs Ranch annexation). Such expenses shall be shared on a proportionate basis by the owners of the property within the District based on percentage of units approved by Garfield County and shall be apid according to the schedule set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. Section 5 Prohibited Sewage Under the terms of this Agreement, each participating party shall be prohibited from discharging into the system any gasoline, oils, greases, or other toxic substances which cannot be treated by the sewage treatment facilities. The parties recognize that the District shall from time to time enact reasonable Rules and Regulations for the District; Foster agrees that it shall fully adhere to said Rules and Regualtions. All plans Section 6 Plans and Specifications Review/ JLC/17 ; 3lR 1 and specifications are subject to District review and approval, at Foster's sole cost. Section 7 Consulting Fees Foster shall pay one-half (1) of all consulting fees (not included in the payment required by Foster in Section 2 Ln/1, ,1, -r-h e �/ <;�, r /1144_J above, associated with the organization of the District up to and including the annexation agreement. This shall include both attorney's fees and expenses. DiSTX;c-rs-41// s r4ren,e,dr or zy/t Z.X/-eaJ'ef poSrc2 1A/C-U/2 "C"- viS% // ��// icSTC/z /T_I 1/7Aa c cr"Jere.,. Ivy - A u l I e, 1- Section 8j4,1/?- !� fj1`f�rc( Service Plan Revision �4t P15 Foster shall pay all costs incurr-ec] in revising the service plan, or amending the service plan for approval by the proper county officials. Costs shall include, but not be limited to, reasonable legal and engineering costs. Di -t- rLi A411 (-0,2u,St, 1=ocrtti AN c re- 44 S'74rCCoSrS, Section 9 Present Operational Costs Foster agrees to advance, on the same terms and conditions as other users, on a proportionate basis based on percentage of units approved by Garfield County and shall b.e paid according to the schedule set forth in Exhibit A, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, the day to day costs .incurred by the District from the time of this Agreement until such time as the District has generated its own operating funds. Section 10 Miscellaneous Covenants A. The District shall establish and enforce reasonable rules and regulations concerning the use of the system by all customers and all users. Further, the District shall establish standby charges, service charges, and plan investment fee charges as the District deems necessary for its operation. B. The District shall at all times operate the entire joint system properly and in an economical manner, making repairs and replacements to assume the continuous operation of the system.. The District shall at all times operate the system to the hest of its ability in conformance with all federal, state, and local statutes and regulations applicable to such facilities. C. The District shall construct improvements to the sewer treatment facilities to provide sewage treatment for users within the District according to the schedule set fort .n Exhibit C, attached hereto and incorporated herein b this reference. D. The District will promptly reconstruct any facilities which are destroyed and for which insurance proceeds are received. E. There shall be no competing private systems constructed within the boundaries of the District, including the Lake Springs Ranch property, and all residential, commercial, indus' ial, and municipal structures wherein wastewater is p-oduced therefrom shall be connected to the District's facilities. F. The parties to this Agreement acknowledge that this Agreement constitutes full agreement between them and that neither parties rely upon any oral representation made by a party or an agent or officer of a party. G. It is understood and agreed that this Agreement shall be in full force and effect until terminated by mutual agreement by the parties hereto or as provided by law. The effective date of this Agreement shall be the day of 1981, and this Agreement shall be binding upon the successors and assigns of the parties hereto. Section 11 Colorado Law - Modification This Agreement is made and delivered within the State of Colorado and the laws of the State of Colorado shall govern its interpretation, validity, and enforceability. This Agreement shall not be varied or terminated except by the written agreement of both parties. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties of this Agreement have executed this Agreement as of the date and year first above written. SPRING VALLEY SANITATION DISTRICT 13y: ATTEST: Secretary President APPROVED AS TO FORM AND SUBSTANCE: LEAVENWORTH, PATRICK & LOCHHEAD, P.C. for the Spring Valley Sanitation District By: • Thomas B. Preston for Foster Petroleum Corporation STATE OF COLORADO COUNTY OF The foregoing instrument was subscribed and sworn to before me this day of , 1981 by President of Spring Valley Sanitation D'st.rict. Witness my hand and official seal. My commission expires: Notary Public REGULAR MEETING, SPRING VALLEY SANITATION DISTRICT March 3, 1981 AGENDA 1. Minutes of Last Special Meeting Approval. 2. Robert Emerson, Esq., attorney for Foster Petroleum Corpor- ation. 3.. Payment of Bills of the District. 4. Appointment of New Director to the Board. 5. Election of Officers. 6. Attorneys Report: A. Certification of Proposed Budget B. Title Policy Authorized C. Check Writing Authorization D. Current Business. 7. Consideration of David Robbins, Esq., for Appointment as Special Counsel to the District. 8. Open Comment. 9. Adjourn. J EXHIBIT M MINUTES OF REGULAR MEETING OF THE SPRING VALLEY SANITATION DISTRICT ti -e72/%(__ At a regular meeting of the Spring Valley Sanitation District held March 3, 1981, at the offices of Leavenworth, Patrick & Lochhead, P.C., 1011 Grand Avenue, Glenwood Springs, Colorado, the following Board of Directors members were pre- sent: Jeffrey M. Bier, Robb Van Pelt, and Philip L. Miller. Absent was Stephen L. Main. Dean K. Moffatt, having been dis- qualified as an elector of the Di -strict and member of the Board, was present but not in attendance as a Director. Also present was a private individual and partner in the Los Amigos Ranch Partnership, Robert W. Chatmas; Robert B. Emerson, repre- senting Foster Petroleum Corporation; loyal E. Leavenworth and Kevin L. Patrick, both of the firm of Leavenworth, Patrick & Lochhead, P.C., counsel for the District; and George W. Zierk. The Meeting was called to order by Philip Miller. The first item on the Agenda was Robert Emerson on behalf of Foster Petroleum Corporation discussing the Lake Springs Development and its petition for annexation into the District. Mr. Emerson stated that Foster Petroleum Corporation wished to construct outfall lines at the Lake Springs Ranch development this spring and summer and, therefore, wished to pursue as quickly as possible an annexation agreement with the District. He staters that Foster Petroleum Corporation could provide capital .or immediate construction of Phase II sewer improve- ments in return for an appropriate agreement of annexation and payment of tap fees. He stated that Jerry Raisch of Vranesh, Raisch & Aron had been retained by Foster Petroleum Corporation to conduct the annexation negotiations on behalf of Foster Petroleum Corporation and a tentative date of March 31 was targeted for a special meeting of the Spring Valley Sanitation District to discuss the possible annexation agreement which had been previously worked out and authorized by the Spring Valley Sanitation District Board pursuant to meetings by the attorneys for each party. Next on the Agenda was the approval of the Minutes of the last special meeting of the Spring Valley Sanitation District Board. The approval was the subject of a motion by Phil Miller, seconded by Robb Van Pelt, and approved 3-0. The next item on the Agenda was a statement by Dean K. Moffatt that he had resigned his post of Director of the District, being disqualified by virtue of his no longer owning property within the District boundaries. The Board then moved to appoint George William Zierk to fill the vacancy left by Dean K. Moffatt. Phil Miller made the motion, Jeff Bier seconded such, and the vote was 3-0. The Board now being comprised of four parties addressed the remaining issues before the Board. The next item on the Agenda was the election of a new Chairman. Robb Van Pelt nominated Jeffrey Bier, such was seconded by Phill Miller, and the vote was unanimous in favor of Jeffrey Bier as the new Chairman of the Spring Valley Sanitation District Board. The next item on the Agenda was the attorneys report. The attorneys indicated that they had been informed by Dalby, Wendland (District accountants) that a proposed budget had been certified as required by law to the State Auditor. Addition- ally, the Board was requested to authorize payment of Title Policy which had been ordered upon the conveyance of waste water treatment facilities by Colorado Mountain College to the District. The Policy had been ordered nearly two year's ago, but the policy had just been issued and a bill sent. The bill was authorized for payment upon motion made by Phil Miller, seconded by Robb Van Pelt, and unanimous approval of the Board. Check writing authorization war, the next item on the Agenda wherein Phil Miller moved that the District authorize Steve Main and Jeffrey Bier as parties able to sign checks on behalf of the District. Such was seconded by Robb Van Pelt and approved unanimously by the Board. The next item on the Agenda was the payment of bills. Pending bills before the District included a 2 -month bill from Holy Cross Electric which was authorized for payment upon motion duly carried and adopted. The next item was a bill by Leavenworth, Patrick & Lochhead, P.C., for legal services for the period December through February in the amount of 5964.45. Upon motion by Phil Miller, seconded by Robb Van Pelt, the bill was authorized for payment. Additionally, a bill was authorized in the amount of $65 to the Bell Agency for bonds of the Directors. Counsel was :instructed to make the necessary amend- ments to the bonds to reflect the new directors' positions. The bill for the title policy premium was also presented. A motion was thereby made to pay all bills upon receipt of funds advanced by the Los Amigos Ranch Partnership and counsel was instructed to request such funds be advanced by the Los Amigos Ranch Partnership at their earliest convenience. This motion was made by Phil Miller, seconded by Robb Van Pelt, and approved unanimously by the Board. The next i.tern on the Agenda was consideration of David Robbins, Esq., for appointment as special counsel to the Dis- trict. Counsel for the District explained to the Board that due to a potential for a conflict of interest arising in matters dealing with the District vis-a-vis the Los Amigos Ranch Part- nership counsel felt it best that the District have independent counsel, as the firm of Leavenworth, Patrick & Lochhead was employed by the Los Amigos Ranch Partnership (LARP) and LARP was proposing an agreement which would provide for the recovery of costs advanced to the District for its organization, con- struction costs, and carrying costs. This Agreement more than likely would be proposed in the form of a recovery contract for fees advanced in return for credits for tap fees. Counsel indicated that due to their prior representation of the Partner- ship, it would be inappropriate for them to represent the District and not the Partnership. Therefore, since the District was a public entity and representation needed to be beyond re- proach, they recommended that counsel seek totally independent legal counsel to negotiate any dealings with the Los Amigos Ranch Partnership. Proposed for consideration was David Robbins of the firm of Friedman, Hill and Robbins. A discussion was had between the Directors as to ' whether or not a local attorney would be available. After some comment it was determined that due to the specialty in the area, the limited number of parties able to represent the District competently who are without potentials of conflicts of interest themselves, that a need was there to seek counsel from a Denver firm. Mentioned as possibles were the firm of Caukins, Kramer, et. al., Holland and Hart, and others, but it was decided that they had a potential of a conflict in time, Raisch & represent f interest having represented the Partnership earlier and the firm of Vranesh, Raisch & Aron. Vranesh, Aron again was foreclosed for they had started to Foster Petroleum Corporation. The law firm of Delaney and Balcomb was also mentioned, but it was pointed out that this firm had also represented Foster. After due consideration of parties available Lo represent the District and considera- tion of Mr. Robbins specifically, the Board moved by motion -2- made by George Ziork that David Robbins be retained through funds advanced by the Partnership, but for which no controls would be placed upon such funds, to represent the District in activities related to the Los Amigos Ranch Partnership. This motion was seconded by Robb Van Pelt and approved unanimously by the Court. An additional item on the Agenda was the appointment of Dean Gordon as Class D Waste Water '!'rcatment Operator for the District. Mr. Gordon was not present at the meeting, but submitted a proposal of `fi150 per moulh for his activities and such was found acceptable by the Board. Upon motion by George Zierk to hire Mr. Dean Gordon accordinq to his proposal and to reimburse him for fees for services rendered to date, the motion ,s seconded by Robb Van Pelt, and carried unanimously by the ::,ard . There being no further business before the District, the meeting was adjourned. ATTEST: itZfa---/ lcretarI [SEAL] v7 /e GEORGE VRANESH JERR•/ W. RAI!SCH THOMAS J. ARON, JR. VRANESH, RAISCH AND ARON ATTORNEYS AT LAW 2120 13,E STREET P. 0. BOX 871 BGULDER, COLORADO 80306 TELEPHONE 303/4..3-G151 May 11, 1981 EXHIBIT N JOHN R. HENDERSON DAVID C. LINDHOLM MICHAEL 0. SHIMMIN RICHARD G. MACKLIN Mr. Alan Friedman 730 17th Street, #220 Denver, CO 80202 Re Spring Valley Sanitation District/Lake Springs Ranch Annexation Dear Alan: Pursuant to our discussion of May 1, 1981, I am enclosing a copy of an o.itline of issues for inclusion in the proposed annexation agreement between Lake Springs Ranch and the Spring Valley Sanitation District. I would also like to reiterate my request to obtain a copy of the proposed "reimbursement contract" between the District and Los Amigos. I would like to have an opportunity to review this proposal and comment, if necessary, to the 17,' ,rd prior to its adoption. I would like to thank you for taking the time to meet with me to discuss the annexation issues. I am confident that we can work out in a timely fashion an annexation agreement that will be fair and equitable both to the District and to Foster. JWR:djs Enclosure cc: Duncan Sinnock Bob Emerson Sincerely, VRANESH, RAISCH AND ARON By a Jury W. R-sch 14 a-& eg76fAl.cct, ,gyp tu-c,LS /yvaG st-`-t-`y ,�-�-� ISSUES FOR INCLUSION IN ANNEXATION AGREEMENT OF FOSTER PETROLEUM LAKE SPRINGS RANCH 1. Foster agrees to pay one-half of any necessary and reasonable costs of district formation provided that Los Amigos pays the other half. If Los Amigos is reimbursed for any of these costs, Foster would expect to be treated similarly. 2. The District will construct at its cost in a timely manner any sewage treatment facilities necessary to treat and dispose of sewage generated by Lake Springs. 3. Foster will construct at its cost all collection facil- ities and sewer lines necessary to get its sewage to the treatment facility. Plans and specifications for such collection system are subject to the district's approval prior to construction. After construction such facilities are subject to the District's inspection and acceptance. Thereafter, such facilities shall be dedicated together with any easements to the District, whereupon they will thereafter be operated and maintained by the District. 4. The District will sell to Foster the unconditional right of sewer.ser_vice for the 215 units in the Lake Springs development. Foster agrees to pay the share of the sewage treatment plant expansion costs attributable to the Lake Springs Project 'e.g., 58,500 gallons per day). 5. The District agrees that if it uses bonding to finance any portion of the sewage treatment plant expansion attributable to Los Amigos or any other area, that neither the Lake Springs property nor its owners shall be liable for repayment of the principal and interest of such bonds. Rather, such payment shall be made solely from proceeds received from tap fees in the Los Amigos area, or any other applicable area. 6. Foster agrees to pay the actual and reasonable costs of the District with respect to its annexation petition, e.g., legal, publication, and any reasonable costs associated with any revision in the service plan of the District if such revision is necessary. MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING OF THE SPRING VALLEY SANITATION DISTRICT A Special Meeting of the Spring Valley Sanitation District was held December 18, 1980, at .the Offices of Leavenworth, Patrick a Lochhead, P.C., 1011 Grand Avenue, Glenwood Springs, Colorad' . The meeting was opening with the following Members of the Board of Directors: Dean K. Moffat, Stephen L. Main, and Jeffrey M. Bier. Also in attendance were Don Callahan of Dalby, Wendland 8 Co.; Lee Leavenworth; and Kevin Patrick. The first item on the Agenda was approval of the previous Minutes, moved by Stephen Main, and duly adopted. The second item on the Agenda was the approval of the execution of a letter retaining Dalby, Wendland & n Co. Caas the District's accountants. This was presented by motion was made by Stephen Main, seconded Board by Members Jeffrey Bier,sent, and the motion carried unanimously by the The third item on the Agenda was a review of the 1980 Budget and the Budget for the year 1981, prepared by Don Callahan of Dalby, Wendland 0 Co. After discussion upon the perspective charges in the 1981 Budget, a motion was made by Jeffrey Bier to approve the 1980-1981 Budgets and to direct Don Callahan of Dalby, Wendland 8 Co: to submit the same to the State Auditor with the assistance of legal counsel, pursuant to the State audit requirements. Motion Bo^ard as secondeds p d by Dean K. Moffatt and passed unanimously by The fourth item on the Agenda was authorization of the payment of the outstanding bills of the Distict, a list of which is attached hereto. All bills were authorized, except the bill to Sundesigns Architects and Planners, the Board feeling that such bill was properly a charge to the Los Amigos Ranch Partnership and not to the Spring Valley Sanitation District. Additionally, a ratification was made of the Holy Cross bill previously paid prior to this Board meeting and the payment of a bill to Aspen Typesetting for letterhead for the District. Addit:rally, there was authorized a letter to be prepared by legal. counsel to be sent to Tom Neal, Managing Partner of the Lns Amigos Ranch Partnership, requesting Mr. Neal to promptly pay Sundesigns Archhitects for the bill submitted to the District in accordance with the discussion held at the meeting. These authorizations were made upon duly made motion of Stephen L. Main, seconded by Jeffrey Bier, and unanimously passed by the Board Members present. The Board made no other action. The meeting was adjourned at 12:30 p.m. GEORGE VRANESH JERRY W. RAISCH THOMAS J. ARON. JR. VRANESH, RAISCH AND ARON ATTORNEYS AT LAW 21201,.. STREET P. 0. ROA 871 BOULDER, COLORADO 00306 Alan Friedman Friedman, "ill & Robbins 730 17th St., Suite 220 Denver, Colorado 802.02 TELEPHONE 303/AA 3-6151 July 8, 1981 EXHIBIT 0 JOHN R. HENDERSON DAVID C. LINDNOLM MICHAEL D. SHIMMIN RICHARD G. MACKLIN Dear Alan: Pursuant to our recent telephone conversation, I have prepared a draft annexation agreement for your review and approval. JWR:cg Enclosure Sincerely yours, VRANESH, RAISCH AND ARON , : ,�.L L .. .. ��-. By _i`/•"� /-� / Jerry j :,,-:nisch /� EXHIBIT P ANNEXATION AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, Made this day of 1981, between SPRING VALLEY SANITATION DISTRICT (hereinafter referred .a as "District"), a sanitation district organized pursuant to C.R.S. 1973, 32-4-101, et secs., and FOSTER PETROLEUM CORPORATION (hereinafter referred to as "Foster"), a Delaware corporation licensed to do business in the State of Colorado. W I T N E S S E T H: Foster is the sole owner of the Lake Springs Ranch property (hereinafter "Lake Springs Ranch"), more specifically defined as follows: A parcel of land described as Lots Five (5) and Six (6) of Section Thirty -Two (32) ; Lots Seven (7) , Eight (8) , Nine (9) , Ten (10) , Eleven (11) , Twelve (12) , Thirteen (13) , Fourteen U.4), Fifteen (15) , Sixteen (16) , Seventeen (17) , Twenty (20), Twenty -One (21), Twenty -Two (22) , Twenty -Eight (28) , and the Northeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter (NE 1/4 SE 1/4) of Section Thirty -Three (33); and the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter (SW 1/4 SW 1/4) of Section Thirty -Four (34), all in Township Six (6) South, Range Eighty -Eight (88) West of the Sixth Principal Meridian. Also Lots Two (2), Three (3), and Nine (9) of Section Four (4), Township Seven (7) South, Range Eighty -Eight (88) West of the Sixth Principal Meridian, County of Garfield, State of Colorado. Foster intends to construct approximately 210 single family dwellings on this property. An annexation petition has been filed by Foster with the District seeking the annexation of. the above-described property into the District. The District and Foster deem it advisable and advantageous to join in and execute an agreement to specifically set forth the terms and conditions upon which the annexation of Lake Springs Ranch shall occur into the District pursuant to C.R.S. 1973, 34-4-122.(1) (a) . CIS ,,y, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing mutual is contained herein and the previously filed petition for annexation, IT IS AGREED AS FOLLOWS: Section I• ANNEXATION The District shall annex Lake springs Ranch provided that Foster fulfills the following conditions: A.- District Organization Costs As of this date, the District has paid approximately $ for the organization of the District. Provided that the Los Amigos Partnership pays an equivalent amount, Foster will pay to the District one half of the reasonable and necessary organization costs of the District. Organization costs shall include, but not be limited to, such items as legal and engineering fees directly associated with the formation of the District. Organization costs shall not include any costs associated with the collection, transmission or treatment of sewage attributable to Los Amigos. B. Foster shall pay all reasonable and necessary costs incurred by the District associated with this annexation. Such costs shall include, but not be limited to, legal, engineering and publication costs as well as costs incurred in revising or amending the District Service Plan if revision or amendment is required by county or state government. Section II: SEWER SERVICE The District shall provide sewer service to the approximately 210 units of the Lake Springs Ranch provided that Foster fulfills the -following conditions: 2 A. Construction of Collection and Transmission.Lines 1. Foster will. construct and pay all costs of sewer collection lines within Lake Springs Ranch as well as all costs of a sewer transmission line to convey the sewage from the Lake Springs Ranch to the existing District Wastewater treatment plant. 2. Prior to commencing construction, Foster shall submit plans and specifications Eor the collection and transmission lines to the District for review and approval by its engineer. Foster agrees to pay all reasonable and necessary costs incurred by the District for such review. 3. The District's engineer shall, at Foster's expense, inspect and approve all collection and transmission lines constructed by Foster. 4. Upon completion of construction Foster shall deed such lines to t..,e District together with any easements necessary for the ful_ure operation, repair and maintenance. 5. Upon acceptance of the collection and transmission lines by the District, the District shall assume responsibility for operation, repair and maintenance of the lines, provided that Foster shall be responsible for a period of one year from date of acceptance for all repairs necessitated by defective materials or workmanship. B. Constiuct.ion of Wastewater Treatment Facilities 1. The District shall be responsible for construction in a timely fashion of wastewater treatment facilities to serve the Lake Springs Ranch. The District:s engineer has estimated that cost of such facilities at S . Foster agrees to pay such costs to the District in advance of construction or in accordance with a schedule of payment to be mutually agreed upon by the parties. 3 „2.. Any subsequent prospective users of the District shall similarly pay for the cost of expansion of the District's wastewater treatment facility. In the alternative, the District may charge such prospective users plant investment or tap fees sufficient to cover the capital cost to the District of providing such service. III. Monthly Service Fees A. Operation and Maintenance The District shall be responsible for all operation and maintenance of the wastewater treatent plant. The costs of such operation and maintenance shall be borne by the users of the District based on their proportionate share of use of the District's facilities. B. Administrative and Other Costs Foster recognizes that Colorado Mountain College may not be obligated to contribute to the ongoing administrative and other costs of the District. Foster shall pay its share of such costs based on its proportionate share of use of the District's facilities (ignoring the use contribution by Colorado Mountain College). C. The District covenants that under no circumstances shall Foster or its successors in Lake Springs Ranch, be obligated to pay any costs attributable to expansion of facilities to serve any new service area within or outside of the District. This shall not prohibit the District from issuing bonds to finance such expansions; however, such bonds shall be paid off solely by the residents of the new service area benefiting from the expanded service. 4 4 JV. Tax Assessments Foster agrees to pay its share of all general tax assessments associated with the District. The District covenants that under no circrostances shall general tax revenues be used to finance, either directly or indirectly, any expansion of facilities to serve any new area within or outside of the .District. V. Miscellaneous Covenants A. The District shall establish reasonable rules and regulations corerning the use of the system by all customers and all users. Such rules and regulations shall be uniformly and fairly enforced. Further, the District may establish standby charges, service charges, and plant investment fee charges in accordance with Colorado statutes as the District deems necessary for its operation. B. The District shall at a1l times operate the entire system properly and in an economical_ manner, making repairs and replacements to assume the continuous operation of the system. The District shall at all times operate the system to the best of its ability in conformance with all federal, state, and local statutes and regulations applicable to such facilities. C. There shall be no competing private systems constructed within the boundaries of the District, including the Lake Springs Ranch property, and all residential, commercial industrial, and municipal structures wherein wastewater is produced therefrom shall be connected to the District's facilities. D. The parties to this Agreement acknowledge that this Agreement constitutes Euil agreement between them and that neither parties rely upon any oral representation made by a party or an agent or officer of a party. 5 E. It is understood and agreed that this Agreement shall be in full force and effect until terminated by mutual agreement by the pa. ies hereto or as provided by law. The effective date of th'3 Agreement shall be the day of 1981, and this Agreement shall be binding upon the successors and assigns of the parties hereto. F. This Agreement is made and delivered within the State of Colorado and the laws of the State of Colorado shall govern its interpretation, validity, and enforceability. This Agreement shall not be varied or terminated except by the written agreement of both parties. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties of this Agreement have executed this Pgreement as of the date and year first above written. ATTEST: Secretary SPRING VALLEY SANITATION DISTRICT By__ President 6 To: Duncan Sinnock From: Robert B. Emerson Date: November 24, 1981 This is an update to the memo that I prepared dated August 14, 1981, concerning the chronology of events regarding Foster Petroleum Corporation's request for annexation into the Spring Valley Sanitation YDistrict. 1. On August 31, 1981, a special meeting of the Spring Valley Sanitation District was held. Minutes of this meeting are attached as Exhibit A. The minutes refer to a special meeting of the District being held on August 6, 1981. To my knowledge, no Foster Petroleum Corporation representatives were either notified of or ttended this meeting. 2. On September 18, 1981, a special meeting of the Board of Directors of the District was held, along with the public meeting of the Board of Directors on the petition for annexation filed by Foster Petroleum Corporation. During the special meeting, the District adopted the statement of principle, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit B. The minutes of the special meeting of the Board of Directors are attached as Exhibit C. In the public meeting, the District deferred action on the annexation petition filed by Foster until November 20, 1981. The reason for continuance of this hearing was because the exact amount of organizational costs had not yet been computed and because the Board wished to act on the recovery contract with Los Amigos prior to ruling on Foster's annexation petition. The minutes of the public meeting are attached hereto as Exhibit D. 3. On October 30, 1981, a special meeting of the District was held. At that meeting, the District voted to approve the recovery agreement between the District and Los Amigos, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit E. 4. On November 20, 1981, the public hearing on Foster's petition for annexation was reconvened. At that time, Foster Petroleum again presented the Board with an annexation agreement, which included the organizational costs and estimated treatment facilities costs. A copy of this agreement is attached hereto as Exhibit F and incorporated herein. After presentation of this agreement, the District voted to require Foster to escrow $3,000.00 to cover the District's legal and engineering costs before any action would be taken on the annexation agreement. The Board then went into executive session to consider Foster's annexation petition. Later in the day, Alan Friedman, the attorney for the Board, contacted me by telephone and advised me that a meeting had been scheduled for December 31, 1981, at which time the District would respond to the annexation petition filed by Foster. • • MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING OF BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF SPRING VALLEY SANITATION DISTRICT A Special Meeting of the Spring Valley Sanitation District was held on August 31, 1981, at 9:00 a.m. in the offices of Mason and Morse, 711 Main Street, Carbondale, Colorado. The following members of the Board of Directors were present: Philip L. Miller, Jeffrey Bier, George Zierk, and Vernon Lykou. The absent member was Robb Van Pelt. Also present were Dean Gordon, District Engineer; Duncan Sennic, representing Foster Petroleum Corporation; William Bowden on behalf of Colorado Mountain College; Greg Hoskins, attorney, representing Los Amigos Ranch Partnership; Malcolm Wall of Los Amigos Ranch Partnership; and Alan Friedman, counsel to the District. The first item on the agenda was the approval of the Minutes of the Special meeting held on August 6, 1981. The Minutes were unanimously adopted as proposed. The next item on the agenda was the payment of bills outstanding. Upon motion duly made and unanimously approved, counsel was directed to pay past bills due and presented already to the Board if sufficient funds were on hand for such purpose. The next item for discussion was the proposed agree- ment between Los Amigos Ranch Partnership and the District regarding recovery of costs. After a discussion lasting several hours, the Board determined to continue further discussion of the proposal to September 11, 1981, at a meeting then to be held by the Board of Directors. T'2re being no further business before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 3:00 p.m. ATTEST: Secretary STATEMENT OF PRINCIPLE SPRING VALLEY SANITATION DISTRICT/LOS AMIGOS RANCH PARTNERSHIP The Spring Valley Sanitation District adopts this statement of principle: 1. Organizational costs of Spring Valley Sanitation District include money advanced by Los Amigos Ranch Partner- ship for attorneys, engineers, accountants, etc.; the detriment to Los Amigos Ranch Partnership resulting from the requirement that it construct 96 apartment units subject to a ten-year rental restriction; and the time value of money from the time money has been expended by Los Amigos Ranch Partnership. Anyone annexing to Spring Valley Sanitation District should pay their proportionate share of the organizational costs and such money should go to Los Amigos Ranch Partnership as a cash payment or as prepaid tap fees. 2. Operating costs advanced by Los Amigos Ranch Partner- ship should be repaid to Los Amigos Ranch Partnership or Los Amigos Ranch Partnership should be given credit on operating charges made to it by Spring Valley Sanitation District. 3. The parties should work diligently in preparation and execution of an agreement which quantifies the values set forth in this statement. MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING OF BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF SPRING VALLEY SANITATION DISTRICT A Special Meeting of the Spring Valley Sanitation Distric' was held on September 18, 1981, at 1:30 p.m. in the Garfield County Board of Commissioners' Meeting Room, 2nd Floor, Garfield County Courthouse, 8th and Colorado Avenues, Glenwood Springs, Colorado. The following members of the Board of Directors were present: Philip L. Miller, George Lierk, and Vernon Lykou. Board member Robb Van Pelt was absent. The names of are reflected on the The first item members of the public who were present tape-recording made of the meeting. on the agenda was the approval of the Minutes of the Special meeting held on August 31, 1981. The Minutes were unanimously adopted as proposed. The next item on the agenda was the filling of the vacancy on the Board of Directors created by the resignation of Jeff Bier. Upon motion Malcolm Wall was nominated of the Board of Directors. by Vernon Lykou, duly seconded, to replace Jeff Bier as a member The motion, after discussion, eras unanimously approved by the Board. Philip L. Miller was appointed Acting Chairman of the Board upon unanimous approval of the Board. The next item for discussion was the proposed recovery agreement submitted by the Los Amigos Ranch Partnership. Grey Hoskin, attorney for Los Amigos Ranch Partnership, presented to the Board a Statement of Principle, a copy of which is appended to these Minutes. Vernon Lykou moved the adoption of the Statement of Principle, with both Malcolm Wall and Philip Miller seconding the motion. After dis- cussion by the Board and after statements made by Robert Emerson and Duncan Sinnock on behalf of Foster Petroleum and oy Rod Anderson on behalf of Colorado Mountain Col lege, the Board, by a unanimous vote of the Board of Directors, adopted the Statement of Principle. At the request of Los Amigos Ranch Partnership, through Greg Hoskin, Philip Miller moved to authorize Los Amigos Ranch Partnership to utilize up to 29.5 presently available and unused EQRs as it sees fit, subject to all governmental approvals, on the condition that Los Amigos Ranch Partnership agrees to compensate the District hy cash or use of credit for said EQRs. Vernon Lykou seconded the motion and, as stated, the motion was duly adopted by a vote of 3 to 1, George Zierk voting no. There being no further business before the Board, the Special Meeting was adjourned and the Puolic Meeting on Foster Petroleum Corporation's Petition for Annexation follow ATTEST: Secretary MINUTES OF PUBLIC MEETING OF BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF SPRING VALLEY SANITATION DISTRICT A Public Meeting of the Board of Directors of the Spring Valley Sanitation District was held, pursuant to published notice, a copy of which is attached to these -Minutes, on September 18, 1981, at 1:30 p.m. in the Garfield County Board of Commissioners' Meeting Room, 2nd Floor, Garfield County Courthouse, 8th and Colorado Avenues, Glenwood Springs, Colorado. The following members of the Board of Directors were present: Philip L. Miller, George Zierk, Vernon Lykou, and Malcolm Wall. Board member Robb Van Pelt was absent. The names of members of the public who were present are reflected on the tape-recording made of the meeting. Robert Emerson made a brief presentation regarding the Petition for Annexation filed on behalf of Foster Petroleum. The Public Meeting upon the Petition was continued to 9:00 a.m., November 20, 1981, at the Los Amigos Ranch House, 2929 County Road 114, Glenwood Springs, Colorado. There being no further business before the Board, the Public Meeting was then adjourned at 2:45 p.m. ATTEST: Secretary 4 PU64 IC NOTICE SOME 01 FILING OF PE11110N FORAY C.USION AND ANNtlA1rON OF ERR IN ME 1t I8: VAI.I EY SANITATION DISTRICT ANO OF 114E PUYIK MEETING TNiREON Ptj6LK NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN Meat o Petition 101 Inclusion and Ann•aotton of territory hos been tiled by Petitioner. Foots Co/potation. o Ddewor• Co• po, o (ileum C tio uteri, petitioning the yprtng. Volley Sarmatian Desist to include thefollowing boar clinic/died teal property withixi • dunes .t sod owtrei.. A parcel of lurid described o. Lots Five (5) end Sur (6) of- Section Thirty Two (32); Lon Seven (74. bgtd (6). Nine (9). Ten (10). E4ven (11), lw.h• (12). Thirteen (12). Fourteen (14). Fifteen (15). Slat.en (161. S•v.nteen (i7). Twenty (20). Twenty One (21). Twisely • Iwo (22). Twenty -Eight (26). ors the Nor- theast Guars.. el the Southeo.l Ch./artist (NE Yi/ ,:) of Section thirty -Tire• (92): and the Southw..l Quarter d the Southwest Chia rte (5W'%. SW'/.) d Section Thirty -Foot (34). all in Township Sia (6) Sw+th, R0119• tlghty•E.ght (66) West of the SOPA Princlpali Meridian Also, Loss Iwo (2). Thr.* (3). and Nin. (9) of Section sour (4). lour ship Swan (7)South. Ranges Lighty Eight (68) West of the Sixth Pr inc ipul M.rdtun. County of Garfield. Slate of Colorado The Petitioner's oddre.a is: P.0 loo 729 6on4+vi14. OAlahornu 74063 PUBLIC NO1 ICE IS ALSO HEREBY GIVEN shot o Pubic Meting to consider d.s,rlk..d P.t.non 1416400 of D1nd An- neaonon shots be hell by Ilse ci lets of me Spring Valley Sanitation District at 1'50 p.m. on Friday. S.psember 16. 1961. (n the Commits/wig Meeting Room, 2nd Floor, Gari told County Courthouse. 8m and Coia aiv Avenue. Glenwood Springs, Cdnroda Al such Mm• and place a6 In- •orls shall opp.ar and show 00ous• J per cae to writing as to why led Pew rat lot Inclusion b+ clusi n led Ann. cation should rented •., vef 161E01. the Soord of Dirac - „i ,,.,a.8 yodel ionito6or. District, Got field L.:or.ty. Colroda, ho. Loused the Public None• to be given tea d •t.w 17*1 day of August. 1961 SPR11.40 VALLEY SANITATION 01STRKI /./}eNrey M. Vet ./.they M. 61er Cholmon ward el Di! WC roti of Spring Volley Spnua6n Dlsxkt pu&lwh.d AlIgu.t 27. September 1. 10, Iota) in the Glenwood 1001. T PROOF OF PUBLICATION GLENWOOD POST STATE OF COLORADO, COUNTY OF GARFIELD. f I, i etet' ss. -7)1;;.1 Ifer N2 12330 do solemnly Cie.; era]. ]ariager swear that I ani of the GLENWOOD POST; that the same is a newspaper printed, in whole or in part, and published in the County of Garfield, State of Colo- rado and has a general circulation therein; that said newspaper has been published continuously and uninterruptedly in said County of Garfield for a period of more than fifty-two consecutive weeks next prior to the first publication of the annexed legal notice or advertise- ment; that said newspaper has been admitted to the United States mails as second-class matter under the pioVi5,ie'ns of the Act or March 3, 1879, or any amendments thereof, and that said newspaper is a newspaper duly qualified for publishing legal notices and ad- vertisements within the meaning of the laws of the State of Colorado. That the annexed legal notice or advertisement was published in the regular and entire issue of every number of said newspaper for the period of `5 consecutive insertions; and that the first pub_ lication of said notice was in the issue of said newspaper dated lL ;tt S t 27 A.D., 1981 , and the last publication of said notice was in the issue of said newspaper dated '' e;) t • 1 ()A.D., In witness whereof I have hereunto set my hand this day o-;ept.t'r)1)e1' A.D. 19 81 General Manager / Publisher Subscribed and sworn to before mc, a notary public in and for the nth County of Garfield, State of Colorado. this day of , tcrr! er A.D., 19 81 (SEAL) • • . .1t. h "rY .ti..tr(1 4- Notary Public 100 My Commission Expires My • ion expires Jath 9� 1284 October 2, 1979. Mr, henry Kane Poster -Petroleum Corporation P. .0. Box 729 Bartlesville, Oklahoma 74063 LaLe Eprings itauch Dear Lonry: 1 'attended the public hearing-beZore the County Commissio ers yesterday o! the.Spring Valley 'Sanitation Distriot. The' CoinmisSioners passed a resolution approving the. formation of the District., ','The'Los -Amigos people.will moVe forwar with the rest of the procedural steps necessary,and 1 anticipate that thc..0istrict will be forrled in approximately:three months. At this point in time, it seems unnaccszary to me to cxecute any }And of agreement with Los Amigos or the Collge. that preparing an, annecation petition that. we can present.:to, the District a soon.as it is'formed is proriably the most appropriate step for Foster to. tMc6. That way, we can •be in a position to move as quickly as poseible once the Districtis. actually formed and we can.so advise the,Comissioners in the subdivision r/rocess. Please let me know i you with oe to go forw;.Ard in this fashion. RBE/jc cc Duncan Sinnock Sincerely, Robert B. Ererion 4. MEMORANDUH. Ounccin Sinnock From: Robert B. Emerson Date:. Apri1•1, 1932 Lakc Springs Ran.I Sewer Problem I :met with Davis FarraronMarch 34:.19324 ragarding the Lak,: .ansh•sevaga• treatment situ4.tion L)avis had been i„..n touch reoently .• ••.., • • , wIth Jerry Roisch as well. • • ••• •••,' Davis suggests a,mecting between the Iltaff ot LbcCOUrty Planninq Department, representatives o1 Foster Petroleum. Corporation, and representatives of the Sanitation District. :Basically, the •ourpose of this meeting is to try to get a commitment from the District 3S to wlit its position is regarding Fostris petition for annexation. The DipacLment, I believe, 1.1ten,:is to cony to the District that the Department will support ,approval of ian alternate source sewage tr.aLment for Foster in the event that the District takcs an. • unreasonable position concerning annf:xstion. At the meeting, Foster nd the District will be given an opporLunity to present their positions regarding this situation. I am hopeful that the Planning Department will be able to act ,as an effective mediator. If not, the oeiAing should provide Foster with additioasi support for alternative proposals. 'Once- get notice of the meeting date, I will pass this inforMAiot on to you. cc:' Jerry Raisch Tom Preston • . . . • • .• • , = To: Duncan Sinnock From: Robert B. Emerson Date: November 24, 1981 This is an update to the memo that I prepared dated August 14, 1981, concerning the chronology of events regarding Foster Petroleum Corporation's request for annexation into the Spring Valley Sanitation District. 1. On August 31, 1.981, a special meeting of the Spring Valley Sanitation District was held. Minutes of this meeting are attached as Exhibit A. The minutes refer to a special meeting of the District being held on August 6, 1981. To my knowledge, no Foster Petroleum Corporation representatives were either notified of or attended this meeting. 2. On September 18, 1981, a special meeting of the Board of Directors of the District was held, along with the public meeting of the Board of Directors on the petition for annexation filed by Foster Petroleum Corporation. During the special meeting, the District adopted the statement of principle, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit B. The minutes of the special meeting of the Board of Directors are attached as Exhibit C. In the public meeting, the District deferred action on the annexation petition filed by Foster until November 20, 1981. The reason for continuance of this hearing was because the exact amount of organizational costs had not yet been computed and because the Board wished to act on the recovery contract with Los Amigos prior to ruling on Foster's annexation petition. The minutes of the public meeting are attached hereto as Exhibit D. 3. On October 30, 1981, a special meeting of the District was held. At that meeting, the District voted to approve the recovery agreement between the District and Los Amigos, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit E. 4. On November 20, 1981, the public hearing on Foster's petition for annexation was reconvened. At that time, Foster Petroleum again presented the Board with an annexation agreement, which included the organizational costs and estimated treatment facilities costs. A copy of this agreement is attached hereto as Exhibit F and incorporated herein. After presentation of this agreement, the District voted to require Foster to escrow $3,000.00 to cover the District's legal and engineering costs before any action would be taken on the annexation agreement. The`Board then went into executive session to consider Foster's annexation petition. Later in the day, Alan Friedman, the attorney for the Board, contacted me by telephone and advised me that a meeting had been scheduled for December 31, 1981, at which time the District would respond to the annexation petition filed by Foster. Exhibit A MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING OF BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF SPRING VALLEY SANITATION DISTRICT A Special Meeting of the Spring Valley Sanitation District was held on August 31, 1981, at 9:00 a.m. in the offices of Mason and Morse, 711 Main Street, Carbondale, Colorado. The following members of the Board of Directors were present: Philip L. Miller, Jeffrey Bier, George Zierk, and Vernon Lykou. The absent member was Robb Van Pelt. Also present were Dean Gordon, District Engineer; Duncan Sennic, representing Foster Petroleum Corporation; William Bowden on behalf of Colorado Mountain College; Greg Hoskins, attorney, representing Los Amigos Ranch Partnership; Malcolm Wall of Los Am,yos Ranch Partnership; and Alan Friedman, counsel to the District. The first item on the agenda was the approval of the Minutes of the Special meeting held on August 6, 1981. The Minutes were unanimously adopted as proposed. The next item on the agenda was the payment of bills outstanding. Upon motion duly made and unanimously approved, counsel w,is directed to pay pest bills due and presented already to the Board if sufficient funds were on hand for such purpose. The next item for discussion was the proposed agree- ment between Los Amigos Ranch Partnership and the District regarding recovery of costs. After a discussion lasting several hours, the Board determined to continue further discussion of the proposal to September 11, 1981, at a meeting then to be held by the Board of Directors. There being no further business before the Board, the meeting was adjourned at 3:00 p.m. ATTEST: Secretary 2 Exhibit B STATEMENT OF PRINCIPLE SPRING VALLEY SANITATION DISTRICT/LOS AMIGOS RANCH PARTNERSHIP The Spring Valley Sanitation District adopts this statement of principle: 1. Organizational costs of Spring Valley Sanitation District include money advanced by Los Amigos Ranch Partner- ship for attorneys, engineers, accountants, etc.; the detriment to Los Amigos Ranch Partnership resulting from the requirement that it construct 96 apartment units subject to a ten-year rental restriction; and the time value of money from the time money has been expended by Los Amigos Ranch Partnership. Anyone annexing to Spring Valley Sanitation District should pay their proportionate share of the organizational costs and such money should go to Los Amigos Ranch Partnership as a cash payment or as prepaid tap fees. 2. Operating costs advanced by Los Amigos Ranch Partner- ship should be repaid to Los Amigos Ranch Partnership or Los Amigos Ranch Partnership should be given credit on operating charges made to it by Spring Valley Sanitation District. 3. The parties should work diligently in preparation and execution of an agreement which quantifies the values set forth in this statement. Exhibit C MINUTES OF SPECIAL MEETING OF BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF SPRING VALLEY SANITATION DISTRICT A Special Meeting of the Spring Valley Sanitation District was held on September 18, 1981, at 1:30 p.m. in the Garfield County Board of Commissioners' Meeting Room, 2nd .Floor, Garfield County Courthouse, 8th and Colorado Avenues, Glenwood Springs, Colorado. The following members of the Board of Directors were present: Philip L. Miller, George Zierk, and Vernon Lykou. Board member Robb Van Pelt was absent. The names of members of the public who were present are reflected on the tape-recording made of the meeting. The first item on the agenda was the approval of the Minutes of the Special meeting held on August 31, 1981. The Minutes were unanimously adopted as proposed. The next item on the agenda was the filling of the vacancy on the Board of Directors created by the resignation of Jeff Bier. Upon motion by Vernon Lykou, duly seconded, Malcolm Wall was nominated to replace Jeff Bier as a member of the Board of Directors. The motion, after discussion, was unani..,ously approved by the Board. Philip L. Miller was appointed Acting Chairman of the Board upon unanimous approval of the Board. The next item for discussion was the proposed recovery agreement submi'Lted by the Los Amigos Ranch Partnership. Greg Hoskin, attorney for Los Amigos Ranch Partnership, presented to the Board a Statement of Principle, a copy of which is appended to these Minutes. Vernon Lykou moved the adoption of the Statement of Principle, with both Malcolm Wall and Philip Miller seconding the motion. After dis- cussion by the Board and after statements made by Robert Emerson and Duncan Sinnock on behalf of Foster Petroleum and 3u11 An (ler 1)5 uu t)I21131 f of Color in (, I li,y1_�, thr.! 21)ar3, Py 011,111 IMO 11s vote of tit ail O I rl_'ct.or i 0i10pti2d [..110 st 1t1�+n�'nt of I inc ili Ai_ the 0,2(luest 01 Los n,irsil ip, tllru1111' cey 11 1, Phil ih r1) 00tilur'itr Los hiliu> .,Anc1) 1' 00tilef'`_i1It) t0 utI1 it1' ,.) r,9 ) pr0sorll I y ,1v11 i I d1, l0 ao11 111103,e11 El11Zs dS i t st, ,511)j52t 21) d 1 1 9Uv0rrlii ( IIt,31 Il3t)ruvJl S, on the condi!: 011 that. Los Amigos Ranch I',)rtnul'sli ip agrees t0 cuulput!i 1f t.ile 11 istr ict I)y Cdsll or 1 c ut crsd i t for said Eiji<• . Vlf r1uii Lykuu socunrlel.l Ulu motion and, as stated, the motion 1/113 Duly adopted 1)y a vut0 of 3 to 1, Georye Ljerk voting no. (hero ultirly riu ful'tlier tlusiefure the Boarrl, the 3001 i ny 033 adjourned and the I'1lu l 12 Moot i ng Un Fust, -.'r Petroleum Curpurat ion's Pet it i15 rur /lrin5Xoti011 t . 1 111...in,1 Secr't,:1' / Exhibit D MINUTES OF I'UULiC MEETING OF BOARD OF DIRECTORS OF SPRING VALLEY SANITATION DISTRICT A Public Meeting of the board of Directors of the Spring Valley Sanitation District was held, pursuant to published notice, a copy of which is attached to these Minutes, on September 18, 1981, at 1:31 p.m. in the Garfield County Board of Commissioners' Meetino Room, 2nd Floor, Garfield County Courthouse, 8th and Colorado Avenues, Glenwood Springs, Colorado. The following members of the Board of Directors were present: Philip L. Miller, George Lierk, Vernon Lykou, and Malcolm Wall. Board member Robb Van Pelt was absent. The names of members of the public who were present are reflected on the tape-recordiny made of the meeting. Robert Emerson made a brief presentation regarding the Petition for Annexation filed on behalf of Foster Petroleum. The Public Meeting upon the Petition ,,.is continued to 9:00 a.ni., November 20, 1981, at the Los Ani os ranch House, 2929 County Road 111, Glenwood Springs, Colur'odu. Th ,re r,cing no further busine s he[ure the Board, the unlit Ne t.intg w;tis then adjourned at 5 p.m. ATI -CST: t i i; r dry r1;b<K u01K! M011Ct Of II(11.(, Of P1.111 /0/1 (On IN lnf ANL) ANNt XA 1ION Of ICR RI7lMY 4.1 THE SYRINI. `.'Alt)+ 1.ANIIA110N CA Hes( AND Of (Nt ruD ,,u111NG. 1/441(,)r1 MAO( 1401IC1 11 N1 t8Y Co EN 44.01 0 I. nnon Ior ha lo,Wr o.d An••a +noel d 1• ,lary hu, p.•n 1.4.4 by Y•rnwn.r Iwl•r r•n o1.,. W.1 (a,y".°non_ a p.a•MUI• Co.• pot p. n, 0anr.q M. 3pr„`q Vall.y of., o Pon. Dl. n,c, .o 01‘1..n.1.•d,. Iulla.•.+q �'r'•W1/1,0•1fM bo.,n d..,<r d..d l.ol prop. rlY d..rt. a of . u,af D,. A pot a•1 of 4.nd d+atb.d o. lo,. 1'1.. (3) 'and 1.. )l) 04 3.01 on Tnv.y 1..o (32). to•, • l...n (1) ligan (1). Nin+ (4) 1.n (10) 11...n (l4) 1..Iv• (12). 'nosh... (13). roue,•." (I1) 414,...1 (13). S:.l•.n (14). 1...n,•.n (ll), 1-.. ! (2U). l...r„y On. (21). 1.,.....y. ..o (12) T.-+rry-lnf,I (24). wd •4. Nor • r...11 Cao •, d m. Sawn.0' O..or,.r (NE V. 1t ;.1 of S«non 1).u1.7 Thew. (3) od 1 •w S<n.1h... ,.o• lot of M1• Sou Gwr..r 13W ...SA' ) .1 S.ar,o' lhn.y foal (}.), ell In lo...n.hw Sl. (o) S..0 M, Roup. oudt ,,y t,gnl (04) w.., of lh• >i.rn rrinclp..4 M.r{d,un Ai* o. tan 1..0 (7). TN.. (3). one KW, (y) 01 Sw•"e' •o..r (.1 l a...n."4, S..•n (7) tool,. Song.. l,ghh ttyl,a (De) w••, of th. 1,. n, rr,rr.y..1 M•,dun Co..nry 01 C.0.1,.1d. two. of Colol url0 11... r ."non., . oJdr•u n I 0 40. 429 0.,.,1••.111• C.A.1.1f.....,no 7.043 NlRt by (.IVEN rvelK NJ1K! 11 At ki .Iw, u Pub!„ Mrn•ti ,a •o..w4.4 Ihe oba•• d.•crrt...i Pell..•" fur flop,ID and A .Ina.d o U0.n ...on., .Nd b. 1'10441'1044by 4o. Smarr.," Ua. rrrl of w. ,.) n. Sp( Volt, 1 341 p rt. on I1.o.., S•p,•'r*4"' 14 I Yb I. In M...ow 4o,on 2nd 4100,. (,,,11.w 4 '",, Cwr.n...r». • ' wd Cowl «,., A.ono. 1;,..... wd Spr.r.4.• tot!, tan.. and plot. oil a, C...•.ra.b AI . and ....,.d p.• VW .h)ll rpp.or cu . „• 1.11,01Vo. lu ,.hy •0d r.nnan.r Ior ono o•..1 Ann•.a,.o., .r,,;ula no t.. on,.,I •..„raJ1 Mr. board of Du.. Y, 1'1 1r 4 e.ar •.a.••, Sanrlu,lu. t , . :y Cot, ..to .• 7.,. r..b'. • ,w ....n o• I ' •, doy of Aoq�•l lu a vtll 4J0' G VA,..3.A1.411 AIYlN D4S1RK1 . v telae, M leer a.tir•y M 4,.r Cho.' Ward al e< 10. J Svr,r 9 vu11.y Solan nn Doan .c, r..e.a, d.•d A..yu•, 7) S.p..rras. r 3 ID 11.. .r, rt. G1•. r...o-.d Poo PROOF OF PUBLICATION GLENWOOD POST STATE 01 (_UI.ORADO, ss. COUNTY OF GARFIELD. I f I' 1 ,,ll) Fru!' l`1' lr swear that 1 and of the G1..[EN\VOOD 1'OST; that the :..lme is a newspaper printed, in whole or in pat!. and published in the County of Garfield, State of Colo- rado and 1),f, ;1 ,teileral circulation thetein; that said newspaper has been publi,li.d c..ln(inuuusly and uninterruptedly in said County of Garfield for a period of more than fifty-two consecutive weeks next prior to the In ,t publication of the annexed legal notice or advertise. !nerd; that sant newspaper has been admitted to the United States moil, as set0)11 class matter ut)dcr )h l,)Jlttittr.. of ,he Act „f Match i. 1679, or any amendments ther414 and that said newspaper is a newspaper duly qualified fur publi7,hin_it legal notices ar)d ad- vertisements within the meaning ut the laws of the Stale of Colorado. N9 12330 .l'1'1).(t11<tr (!4. du solemnly That the annexed legal notice or advertisement was published in the regular and entire issue of every number ut said newspaper aur the period of.. ' _... consecutive inset tions; and that the first pub. licat OII of said notice: was in the issue ut said newspaper dated -.11:-.11t-;t. AD., 19 - , a:)d Ilse last publication of said notice \41,,t-. in the issue of said newspaper darted ' A 1L, 19 1(lllt In witness vchelel.lf 1 have hereunto set my haunt this day of A.U. 19 _L.__ l 1 Geuet..1 TAanayer / Publishertii / Subscribed and swot n to beturc me, a notary public in and for 11.e Count) of C.at field, State of Colorado. this day ut t A.D., 19 `` f r Notary Pll (S E A 1. ) ,�rl..�..c. . . �.�;..... : ... rn.:.c..S.t......... -�- lic; My Sion oxpirl►s Jen 9l 19 ?iV Cotn1 (7.siufa 1`.,X4)ires - AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered into this day of 1981, by and between SPRING VALLEY SANITATION DIs:'1_ a quasi -municipality duly organized under the laws of the State of Colorado (hereinafter "SVSD") and LOS AMIGOS RANCH PARTNERSHIP, a Colorado general partnership (hereinafter "LARP"); W ITNESSET H: WHEREAS, on July 2, 1979, the individual members of LARP entered into a Sewage Treatment Service Agreement (hereinafter "STS Agreement") with Colorado Mountain Junior College District (hereinafter "CMC"); WHEREAS, the service plan for formation of SVSD dated July, 1979, annexed a copy of the STS Agreement; WHEREAS, the service plan states that SVSD will build and c,.n all sewer lines and expansions to the sewer plant and that SVSD will finance such lines and plant expansion and LARP will pay for the amounts financed through system development fees and a mill levy (because all of the property within SVSD was and is owned by LARP), with CMC paying for increased usage with system development fees; WHEREAS, the STS Agreement provides for the construction restrictions undesireable by LARP of eight apartment buildings and for on said apartments which may make them rental commercially for sale on the commercial market and which have resulted in a high vacancy rate and high maintenance cost; WHEREAS, LARP has undertaken construction on behalf of SVSD and has expended money on behalf of the District on the assumptions set forth in the service plan; WHEREAS, if LARP were to remain the sole owner of the property within SVSD and, together with CMC, the sole entity serviced by SVSD, the money spent by LARP, the time and effort expended by LARP on behalf of SVSD and any financial detriment suffered by LARP in constructing apartment/units pursuant to the STS Agreement would all be for the benefit of LARP and LARP would be justified in using its credit or taking such action as would be necessary to assist SVSD in financing lines and plant expansion; WHEREAS, a petition for annexation to SVSD has been submitted by Foster Petroleum Corporation, a Delaware corporation, considerable negotiation has been undertaken, counsel for SVSD and LARP has resigned, and new counsel has been employed by each of SVSD and LARP; WHEREAS, it is understood that LARP would prefer that SVSD not annex new areas or serve new areas because of the difficulty in arriving at an equitable arrangement with LARP for money and effort expended to date and detriment suffered and to be suffered, but LARP recognizes that the discretion of SVSD should not be restricted and that if SVSD determines it is in the best interests of SVSD to annex or service other areas, it should have the discretion to do so; WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of SVSD adopted a resolution at its September 18, 1981 Board meeting regarding determining organizational costs of SVSD and in furtherance of such determination, LARP has submitted to the SVSD an appraisal concerning the eight apartment buildings referred to above; WHEREAS, the Board of Directors of SVSD has determined by resolution that the execution of this Agreement is in the public interest and in the interest of SVSD, that necessity demands the acquisition of the improvements provided for herein, and that this Agreement is for and will permit SVSD to carry out the objects and purposes of the district; and WHEREAS, the parties desire to set forth their agreement in writing: NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the premises and of the mutual covenants contained herein, the parties agree as follows: except 1. The succeeding provisions of this Agreement, those in paragraphs 2, 3, 6, 9, 10, 11, 12 and 14 shall have no once or effect unless and until SVSD annexes additional 2 area to SVSD (other than additional area which might be requested by LARP) or agrees to serve persons or entities other than LARP and CMC (reference to "CMC" herein shall include Pinon Alps. pursuant to the agreement between Pinon Alps and CMC in effect July 2, 1979) as specifically provided in the STS Agreement. In any event, this Agreement shall terminate twenty-one years from date hereof. 2. In the event the provisions of this Agreement do not become operative until after the parties have undertaken financial arrangements to further expand the plant and/or lines to serve LARP, SVSD shall take all such action at or prior to annexation of other property (other than additional area which might be requested by LARP), or agreement to serve persons or entitie other than LARP and CMC, as is necessary to relieve LARP and property of LARP from such financial arrangement and financial obligation insofar as such financial arrangements and obligations relate to provision of the ISV EQR's referred to in paragraph numbered 5 below. For example, if LARP requests SVSD to enlarge the plant after the date of this Agreement and to install lines as provided in the service plan to provide 50 EQR's (of the /Jz,/ EQR's), LARP advances the cost of construction therefor to SVSD and SVSD subsequently annexes additional area; then, upon such annexation SVSD would repay LARP such cost and reasonable interest thereon. No portion of such repayment amount would be collected from LARP directly or indirectly, such as through a mill levy on property of LARP. 3. There shall be no obligation on LARP to advance funds to SVSD after date hereof. However, as to any such amounts advanced, promissory notes shall be executed bearing interest at two percent below the prime rate of First National Bank in Glenwood Springs on date of execution of a note, to be payable to LARP upon SVSD annexing additional area (other than additional area which might be requested by I,ARP) or agreeing to serve persons or entities other than LARP and CMC, as specifically provided in the STS Agreement. 3 4. It is acknowledged that there is no precise way to quant y the detriment to LARP by being required to construct the ar- lrtment buildings pursuant to the STS Agreement, however, the Board of SVSD has considered the appraisal submitted by LARP and the approach set forth below. SVSD, through its representative, has had the opportunity to examine the applicable records of LARP and the parties agree that LARP has expended the following sums for or on behalf of SVSD: A. Phase I improvements at the SVSD plant site which increased the capacity of the existing facility to serve the eight apartment buildings (96 units) in addition to the existing uses: B. An eight -inch sewer line from the LARP development and the apartment site to the SVSD site: (The SVSD engineer has allocated $68,409.00 of such amount expended on the line to the 96 units) C. Organizational costs (not considering the detriment relating to the apartment units) D. Advanced operating costs: $21,504.00 247,136.00 57,547.00 26,817.00 $353,004.00 Of the amounts expended, the Phase I impro•7ements in the amount of $21,504.00 and the allocated portions of the sewer line of $68,409.00, for a total of $89,913.00, are directly allocable to the 96 units. According to the EQR Schedule established in the service plan, these units will use 59 EQR's for an EQR value of $1,525.00 per EQR. The amount expended set forth above, except advanced operating costs, divided by this EQR value equals 4 1 213 EQR's. should grant for the This would indicate, a system development eight -building apartment and LARP has suggested, SVSD fee credit to LARP of 59 EQR's complex described Agreement and 154 EQR's for the other amounts set forth In this paragraph numbered 4; provided, however, fee equal to the allocated to the in this STS LARD should be charged a time value of moneyer P year on the EQR's not eight building apartment complex. An example would be, if a connection for one EQR were made during the period between one year and two years from date hereof based on an EQR value of $1525.00 and 10% interest (simple), a fee of $152.50 for such connection would be paid by LARP. If such a connection were made between three and four years from date hereof, the amount to be paid by LARP would by $457.50. 5. SVSD hereby grants to LARP of 59 EQR's described in the STS i' `/ EQR's to LARP; fee equal to of $ a system development fee credit)/ for the eight building apartment complex Agreement and hereby grants an additional provided, however, LARP shall be charged a /O % per year (computed on a simple interest basis) Connections U U . for all such EQR's shall be made on or before twenty-one years from date hereof. which Any such EQR's for connections have not been made on or before such time shall expire. 6. SVSD shall p p X/ +tet rom tly repay to LARP the/advan6ed operating costs in the amount of $26,81 7.00 either in the,form of cash or by credits to LARP for service charges incurred and to be incurred by LARP to SVSD. Any amounts not repaid or used as a credit by August 1, 1982, shall bear interest from August 1, 1982 at two percent below Glenwood Springs. 7. Additional EQR's requested by LARP in excess specified herein shall be paid for by LARP at the then SVSD system development fee rates. 8. SVSD shall have the continuing obligation under the service plan to finance and construct all lines specified and EQR's prevailing the prime rate of First National Bank in �- of 5 plant improvements from any available funds, regardless of source (in easements shown upon dedicated plats by LARP). Unless contrary to applicable law, the property of LARP shall not have a mill levy placed upon it which is larger than the mill levy upon any other property annexed into the District. LARP specifically has no obligation to make any efforts with regard to bonding that are different than any other landowner in a special improvement district in Colorado established under Article 4, Title 32, Colo. Rev. Stat. (1973, as amended). 9. Of the 59 EQR's allocated to the 96 units, presently 29.5 EQR's are being used. The remaining 29.5 EQR's shall be allocated to the unbuilt 48 units of such 96 units so long as LARP is obligated to CMC to construct such units. In the event that, for any reason, LARP is relieved of this obligation, LARP shall have the right to freely transfer such 29.5 EQR's. LARP may use the 29.5 EQR's allocated to the unbuilt 48 units elsewhere in the development on the condition that if sewer plant capacity is needed upon building the 48 unbuilt units referred to herein that LARP shall provide funds to enlarge the sewer plant to accommodate the 29.5 EQR's so required (which funds may be recouped hereunder only if additional area is annexed to SVSD). LARP has the right to freely transfer the /1 EQR's referred to above in paragraph numbered 5. 10. LARP consents to the Lease and Agreement between CMC and SVSD dated February 26, 1980, recorded in the office of the Clerk and Recorder of Garfield County, Colorado, in BOok 575 at Pages 117-135. 11. LARP hereby indemnifies and agrees to hold SVSD harmless from and against any obligation under paragraph numbered 3 of the STS Agreement. Such obligations shall remain the sole responsibility of LARP. 12. In the event a court of competent jurisdiction determines SVSD may not utilize any source of funds or money to pay any obligations to LARP provided in paragraphs numbered 3 and 6 above, such determination shall not affect the validity of the 6 obligations .�u or relieve SVSD of its agreement to pay LARP from sources legally 13. In the event any paragraph or covenant, or portion thereof, contained herein is determined by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, such determination shall not affect the validity of this Agreement as a whole or any other part or provision thereof other than the paragraph or covenant or portion SJ adjudged invalid. With regard to any such provision adjudged invalid, the parties shall negotiate and execute an agreement which will substantially effect in a lawfully manner the results sought to be achieved in such invalidated paragraph or covenant. 14. LARP agrees to pay the premium for a director's liability insurance policy for SVSD directors for a period of three years, at a cost to LARP not to exceed $1,000.00 per year. permissable. LARP agrees to indemnify and hold harmless SVSD and the of SVSD, in both their official capacity as directors individuals, from and against any and all liability and Directors and as expense, including their reasonable attorneys' fees and expenses, as a result of their executing this Agreement and implementing the provisions thereof. This indemnity is not for the benefit of third persons, is to supplement, not abrogate, the statutory and common law immunity of public officials and is to supplement the directors liability insurance referred to above. 15. The parties agree and acknowledge that, pursuant -I-'lot to Colo. Rev. Stat. § 32 El_12-4 (1973, as amended) , the approval by the electors of SVSD of this Agreement is required as a condition precedent for this Agreement to be effective. SVSD agrees to hold such an election as soon as reasonably possible. Upon approval as required by law, this Agreement shall automatically be effective. 16. This Agreement supercedes and controls all prior written and oral agreements or representations of the parties and is a total integrated agreement among the parties. 7 17. This Agreement may not be amended except by subsequent written agreement by the parties and by compliance with any requirements of law. 18. Whenever written communications are authorized, required or desired in connection with this Agreement, the same shall be deemed given or made when delivered in person, when addressed to the party for whom intended at the address set forth below, and deposited in the U.S. mail, certified mail, return receipt requested, or at such other address as either party may designate from time to time by written notice given in accordance with this paragraph: Los Amigos Ranch Partnership c/o Thomas E. Neal Managing Partner 327 South LaSalle Street, Suite 1724 Chicago, Illinois 60604 Spring Valley Sanitation District 19. This Agreement shall inure to the benefit of, and be binding upon the parties, their successors in interest and assigns. 20. By signing this Agreement, the parties acknowledge and represent to one another that all procedures necessary to validly contract and execute this Agreement have been performed, and that the persons signing for each have been duly authorized, to do so. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement, duplicate originals, on the day and year first above written. LOS AMIGOS RANCH PARTNERSHIP, a Colorado general partnership By: Thomas E. Neal, Managing Partner "LARP" SPRING VALLEY SANITATION DISTRICT ATTEST: By: Secretary Chairman of the Board of Directors "SVSD" 8 Exhibit ANNEXATION AGREEMENT THIS AGREEMENT, Made this day of 1981, between SPRING VALLEY SANITATION DISTRICT (hereinafter referred to as "District"), a sanitation district organized pursuant to C.R.S. 1973, 32-4-101, et sPa., and FOSTER PETROLEUM! CORPORATION (hereinafter referred Lo as "Foster") , a Delaware corporation licensed to do business Colorado. in the State of W I '1' N E S S[ '!' f( : Foster is the sole owner of the Lake Springs Ranch property (hereinafter "Lake Springs Ranch"), more specifically defined as follows: A parcel of land described as Lots Five (5) and Six (6) of Section Thirty -Two (32) ; Lots Seven (7) , Eight (8) , Nine (9) , Ten (10) , Eleven (11) , Twelve (12) , Thirteen (13) , Fourteen (14) , Fifteen (15) , Sixteen (16) , Seventeen (17) , 'twenty (20) , Twenty -One (21) , Twenty -Two (22) , Twenty -Eight (28) , and the Northeast Quarter of the Southeast Quarter (NE 1/4 SE 1/4) of Section Thirty -Three (33); and the Southwest Quarter of the Southwest Quarter (SW 1/4 SW 1/4) of Section Thirty -Four (34) , all in Township Six (6) South, Range Eighty -Eight (88) west of the Sixth Principal Meridian. Also Lots Two (2), Three (3), and Nine (9) of Section Four (4), Township Seven (7) South, Range Eighty -Eight (88) west of the Sixth Principal Meridian, County of Garfield, State of Colorado. Foster intends to construct approximately 210 single family dwellings on this property. An annexation petition has been filed by Foster with the District seeking the annexation of the above-described property into the District. The District and Foster deem it advisable and advantageous to join in and execute an agreement to specifically set forth the terms and conditions upon which the annexation of Lake Springs Ranch shall occur into the District pursuant to C.R.S. 1973, 34-4-1.22(1) (a) . NOW THEREFORE, in consideration ot the foregoing mutual covenants contained herein and the previously filed petition for annexation, IT IS AGREED AS FOLLOWS: Section I : ANNEXA'T'ION The District shall annex Lake Spr Hcjs Ranch provided that Foster fulfills the following condition: a A. District Organization Costs As of this date, the District has paid approximately $ 105868.00 _ for the organization ._;f r.he District. Provided that the `,os Amigos Partnership pay an f q.;ivalent amount, Foster will pdy to the District one hal; of the reasonable and necessary organization costs of the District. Organization costs shall include, but not be limited to, such items as legal and engineering lees directly associated with the formation of the District. Organization costs shall not include any costs associated with the collection, transmission or treatment of sewage at :r ibutable to Los Amigos. B. Voster shall pay all reasonable and necessary costs incurred by the District associated with this annexation. Such costs shall include, but not be limited to, legal, engineering and publication costs es well as costs incurred in revising or amending the District Service Plan it revision or amendment is required by county or state government. Section II: SEY;EI: SERVICE The District: shall provide sewer necvice to the approximately 210 units of the Lake Springs Ranch provided that Foster fulfills the following conditions: r A. Construction of Collection and Transmission Lines 1. Foster will construct and pay all costs of sewer collection lines within Lake Springs Ranch as well as all costs of a sewer transmission line to convey the sewage from the Lake Springs Ranch to ,The existing DistricL Y' st'water treatment plant. n Prior to commencing construction, Foster shall submit plans and specifications for the collection and transmission lines to the District for review and approv,_,1 by its engineer. Foster agrees to pay all reasonable and necessary costs incurred by the -.strict for such review. 3. The District's engineer shall, at Foster's expense, inspect and approve all collection and transmission lines constructed by Foster. 4. Upon completion of construction Foster shall deed such lines to the District together with any easements necessary for the future operation, repair and maintenance. 5. Upon acceptance of: the collection and transmission lines by the District, the District shall assume responsibility for operation, repair and maintenance of the lines, provided that Foster shall be responsible for a period of one year from date of acceptance for all repairs necessitated by defective materials or workmanship. B. Construction of Wastewater Treatment Facilities 1. The District shall be responsible for construction in a timely fashion of wastewater treatment facilities to serve the Lake Sprinys Ranch: The Districts engineer has estimated that cost of such facilities at $ 325,000,00 Foster agrees to pay such costs to the District in advance of construction or in accordance with a schedule of payment to be mutually agreed upon by the parties. 3 2. Any subsequent prospective users of the District shall similarly pay for the cost of expansion of the District's wastewater treatment facility. In the alternative, the District may charge such prospective users plant investment or tap fees sufficient to cover the capital cost to the District of providing such service. II Monthly Service Fees A. Operation and Maintenance The District shall be responsible for all operation and maintenance of the wastewater. Lreatent plant. The costs of such operation and maintenance shall be borne by the users of the District based on their proportionate share of use of the District's facilities. D. Administrative and Other Costs Foster recognizes that Colorado mountain College may not be obligated to contribute to the ongoing administrative and other costs of the District. Foster shall pay its share of such costs based on its proportionate share of use of the District's facilities (ignoring the use contribution by Colorado Mountain College). C. The District covenants that under no circumstances shall Foster or its successors in Lake Springs Ranch, be obligated to pay any costs attributable to expansion of facilities to serve any new service area within or outside of the District. This shall not prohibit the District from issuing bonds to finance such expansions; however, such bonds shall he paid off solely by the residents of the new service area benefiting from the expanded service. IV. Tax Assessments Foster agrees Lo pay its share of .a11 general tax assessments associated with the District. The District covenants that under no circinstances shall general tax revenues be used to finance, either directly or indirectly, any expansion of facilities to serve any new area within or outside of the a District: V. Miscellaneous Covenants A. The District shall establish reasonable rules and regulations concerning the use of the system by all customers and all users. Such rules and regulations shall be uniformly and fairly enforced. Further, the District may establish standby charges, service charges, and plant investment Fee charges in accordance with Colorado statutes as the District deems necessary for its operation. R. The District shall at al] time:; operate the entire system properly and in an economical manner, making repairs and replacements to assume the continuous operation of the system. The District shall at all times operate• the system to the best of its ;abi' .y in conformance with all federal, state, and local statute_; and regulations applicable Lo such facilities. C. There shall be no competing p: ivate systems constructed within the boundaries of the District, including the Lake Springs Ranch property, and all residential, commercial, industrial, and municipal structures wherein wastewater is produced therefrom shall be connected to the District's facilities. D. The parties to this Agreement acknowledge that this Agreement constitutes full agreement between them and that neither parties rely upon any oral representation made by a party or an agent or officer of a party. 5 E. It is understood and ayrer.d Lh L tiri:, Agreement shall be in full force and effect until terminated by mutual agreement by the parties hereto or as provided by law. The effective date of this Agreement shall be the day of 1981, and this Agreement shall be binding upon the successors and • assigns of the parties hereto. F. This Agreement is made and delivered within the State of Colorado and the laws of the State of Colorado shall govern its interpretation, validity, and enforceability. This Agreement shall not be varied or terminated except by the written agreement of both parties. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties of this Agreement have executed this Agreement as of the date and year First above written. ATTEST: Secretary SPRING VALLEY SANITATION DISTRICT 13y ire iilent ACRE f. N1 I: N -H1S AGREEMENT, Made and entered into this day of 1979, by and between ROBERT W. C{{ATMAS, JAN A. . JOHNSON, and 'THOMAS E. NEA1. (hereinafter "Los Amigos") and (hereinafter 'Lake Springs"); WITNESSETH: WHEREAS, Los Amigos owns the real property described on Exhibit "A," attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, upon which it desires to develop portions of said property primarily for residential purposes and to provide a community sewage Lreatement system; and WHEREAS, Lake Springs owns the real property described on Exhibit "l3," attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, upon which it desires to develop portions of said property primarily for residential purposes and to provide a commmunity sewage treatment system; and WHEREAS, Los Amigos desires Lo form a s,rnit_ation district pursuant Co C.R.S. 1973, Sec. 32-4-101, et seq., as amended, to provide sewage treatment services for the Spring Valley area, the exact boundaries of which have not yet been determined; and WHEREAS, Lake Springs may desire to participate in and be serviced by said sanitation district upon after receiving the county approvals necessary to develop its property; and WHEREAS, Los Amigos and Colorado Mountain Junior College fte/),- 4!r{ District ar-e e{.►-� rcuit? y--tizc.Nse-c4- -- Ung an agreement regarding the formation of said District and conveyance of current sewage treatmcnL Eaeitities, currently owned by the College, and construction of improvements thereto which wi.1. be the basis for said sanitation district sewage treatment services and facility expansions; and WHEREAS, the facilities belonging to Colorado Mountain Junior College District as improved will be sufficient to permit se er service to be provided to the development contemplated by Lake Springs. NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants contained herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. Lake Springs agrees not to oppose a petition for formation oL a sanitation district lur the Spring Valley area pursuant to C.R.S. 1973, Secs. 32-4-101, et seq., as amended, and further agrees to support and Cully cooperate in the formation of such a district. 2. Lake Springs supports the drill: Service Plan for the Spring Valley Sanitation District, dated May 18, 1979, prepared by Wright -McLaughlin Engineers, and agrees to support the Final Service Plan Lo be prepared by Los Amigos which will exclude the property o1 Lake Springs Ranch from LLc District boundaries. 3. Los Amigos agrees to nsu a 1 1_ reasonable efforts to supr t the inclusion of Lake Sprin's within the service area of 'he Spring Valley District and the provision of. sewer service to Lake Springs upon terms and toilet i t i ons wkii'„c,„L„,,. ,.zt,L. mutually acceptable to the parties. li y signing this Agreement, the parties hereto acknowledge and represent toonu another that all procedures necessary to validly contract and execute this Agreement have been performed and that persons signing for each party have been duly authorized to do so. 5. This 'Agreement shall be binding upon and inure Lo the benefit of the heirs, successors, and assigns QC the parties. WHEREFORE, the parties have executed this Agreement, in triplicate originals, on the day and year first above written. LOS AMIGOS By By koT)ert W. Chatrnas J,_arnes A. k. Johnson iy s Neal LAI< S L' RINGS RANCH Jr' PUBLIC NOTICE Cl Take Notice that Thous E. Neil and James A. R. Johnson, owners of Los Amigos Ranch WN3,4 (have) applied to the Board of County Convnissioners, Garfield County, State of Colorado, to grant a Preliminary Plat approval in connection with the following described property situated in the County of Garfield, State of Colorado; to -wit: Legal Description: SET' ATTACHED Practical Description: Approximately y four (4) miles SE of Glenwood Springs on the North side of Spring Valley Road, just SW of Colorado Mountain College. Said Preliminary Plat is to allow the Petitioner(s) to resubdivide a parcel of 1.and_fo3 merly_ recordPri as Tns Ami gos_ Fi ing 12 rr-c-nrdorl on March 1, 1980 'Thi c rc crest -cc ifains--2-91-.-4b—a< -es-and-eonsis-ts--0.f-5 oc the above described property. ..4 ;thin A11 persons affected by the proposed Subdivision are invited to appear and state their views, protests or objections. If you cannot appear personally at such meeting, then you are urged to state your views by letter, particular-ly if you have objections to such Preliminary Plat, as the Board of County Commissioners will give consideration to the conunents of surrounding property owners and others affected in deciding whether to grant or deny the request for preliminary plat. This preliminary plat application may be reviewed at the office of the Planning Department located at 2014 Blake, Glenwood Springs, Colorado betwr ,1 the hours of 8:00 A.M. and 5:00 P.M., Monday through Friday. That public"hearing on the application for the above preliminary plat has been set for the 26th day of April , 1982 , at the hour of A_15 A M at the office of the Planning Department at 2014 Blake Ave. L> �-� -Ai .Dennis A. Stranger County Planning Director Garfield County, Colorado rli061'�-I: �'Er NEN BY MESE PRESENTS Chat JAMES A. E• NEA1.r: being nolo owncra in fee simple of all R.JOHNSON proANDperty THOMAS described a¢'follous; property A parcel of land situated in art of part of Government Lots 1,2,5,7,9 and G10`and ethe nt LSItNE' , Section d, the NEkSi of Section 5, part of Government Lots 4 i a ]v6 `S and the SANEk of Section 6 all in Township7 .5 and 6 the Sixth Principal Meridian in the Countysof[Garfield 88 West of to Said parcel ,.sing- southerly, State of. Colorado, in part of the northerly line of said Section 5, and Northwesterly of -the Northwesterly for County Road Number 114 (College Road). right-of-way right-of-way line y line being ) Said Northwesterly rig centerline l of g 30.00 feet northwesterly of and parallel to said county road as constructed and in parcel being more particularity described as follows; place. Said Commencing at the Northeast Corner of found in place and properly marked; said Section 8, thence S. 73°15'34" W. 1 S corner feet to a point on said Northwesterly 1508.E7 POINT OF BEGINNING; thence along said northwesterly line, the 'TRUE line along a curve to the left, having; a radius of 2341, y right-of-uay n central angle of 01°28'17", a distance of 60,13 feet71 feet and 5. 19°55'58" W. 60.13 feet) to apoint(chord burs right-of-way line.of LOS AMIGOS DRIVEbeing gright-of-waylso °n [he southwesterly 60.00 feet in width; thence continuing along snorthwesterl Also of -way line along a curve to the Left, having a radius of 2341.71 feet and a central angle of 0°24'22" Y right- of-way , a distance of 20.00 feet S 18°57'02"W. 20.00 feet), thence S 18°42'21" (chord bears S 18°42'21" W. 30.12 feet, thence N 66°16'26" W. 516.44 feet;etees N 34°14'42" W. 380.00 feet• thence N 8°41' 25.3 thence 41'22" E. 9.09 feet; thence N 30°28'17" W. 22 E. 275.91 fent; thence N 8° 28'25" W. 411.41 feet; thence N 44°23'12" W.8 67.8484 feet; •then eN 300 40'28" W. 27.77 feet; thence N 89°21'52" V. feet; thence N 56° W. 60.00 feet; thence N 89° 21'52" '; 379.23 feet; thence N 89°21'5'" W. 366.98 feet; thence N84°Oh'S2" �,; 400.00 feet; thence N 79°06'52" 300.00 feet; thence N. 1003'03„ E. 7SO.OU fee[; thence N 27°36'52" W. 71,26 feet; thence N 2°31`00" E. ;13.76 feet; thence N 30008'Og'+ll. feet; thence N 35'5 2°3 1' 10n.00 feet; thence 87°29'00" W. 354.65 feet; thence N 17°� " 52,x1, feet; thence N 27"30'20" W. 1430.00 feet; °3 '3 F. 462.49 feet; thence N 5°06' 19" E. thence N /i8"3J' 37" W. 930.00 thence S 17°04'42"ceN 525.00 feec; thence N 56°18'34" E. 650.00 feet; E. 311.49 feet; thence N 72Q55'18" E. along a curve to the left having a central angle of 110 60." feet; 511.52 feet __ K 26 40 thence (chord bears S 22°48'02" E. 510,67 feet a distance of ); thence S 28°31'22" E. 46.93 feet; thence along a curve to the left having a central angle of 37°19'41" n distance of 362.27 feet (chord hears S 47°11'12" E. 355.90 feet); r once along n curve to the right having a central angle of 30°54'01" a distance of 248.63 feet (chord bears S 50°24'02" • fecr); thence S 34°57'02" E. 719.47 feet; thence along a curve'to.the3 left having a central angle of 20°20'38" a distance of 305.02 feet (chord bears S 45°07'20" E. 303.42 feet); thence S 55°17'39" E. 368.02 feet; thence along a curve to the left having a central angle of 45°47'14" a distance of 167.16 feet (chord bears S 78°11'16" E. 162.74 feet); thence N 78°55'07" E. 227.57 right having n central angle of 15°00'11curve to 11" adistance ence nofa108.61 feet (chord bears N 86`'25'14" F. 108.30 feet); thence along a curve to the right having a central angle of 14`'37'53" a distance of 7].50 feet (chord bears S 78°45'44" E. 71.31 feet); thence N 24014'15" E, 461.05 feet; thence N 60°43'48" E. 430.00 feet; thence S 77°13'39" E. 585.00 feet; thence N 41°00'11" E. 609.01 feet; thence along a curve to t}1C richt having a central angle of 3°02'28" a distance of 240.52 feet -(chord bears N 15°24'03" W. 240,49 feet); thence along a carve to the right leaving a central eng1c of 4°23'14" a distance of 93.11 feet (chard burs N 11°41'12" W. 93.09 feet) ; thence N 9°29'34" V. 71.77 feet; thence along n curve to the right having a central angle of 31° 05'55" a distance of 358.33 (chord bears N 6°03'23" E. 353.95 feet); thence N 21°36'21" E. 29.67 feet; thence along 3 curve to the right having a central angle of 20°28'16" a distance of 288.89 feet (chord bears N 31°50'30" E. 287.36 feet); thence along having a central angle of 6°27'16" a distance ofa125 45 feeth( (chord right bears N 45°18'17" E. 125.38 feet; thence N 0°16'34" E. S 89°43'26" E..1119.56 feet; thence S 1°22'42" W.. 068.55 feet; thence N 88°37'18" W. 915.12 feet; thence S-2°11'43" W. 20.01802,fe06 feet; thence S 8°00'17" E. 237.55 feet; thence S 14°12' " 570.000 feet; thence 18 E. feet; thence • S 39°01.'30"W. 510.00 feet; thence S 58°26'I5" W. 412.1 feet; thence S 88°10'05" E. 690.00 feet; thence S 80°48'37" W. 205.22 feet; thence along a curve to the right having a central engle of 47°49'31" a distance of 278.40 feet (chord bears S 34029'27" E. 270.39 feet);o " ence E. 154.95 Cect• th[hence S 10 34 41 o ,along a curve to the left having a central angle of 1415'04" 04 a distance of 145.28 feet (chord bears S 17°42'14" F..l44,91 feet); thence S'24°49'46" E. 87.70 feet; thence along a curve to left having a central anglef 46°41'20" (chord bears S 4801O'26" E,/21,2 25, a distance 231.78 feet feet); thence S 71°1° 31'06" E. 97.01 feet; thence along a curve/to the right having a central ankle of 270 31'10" a distance of 362;25 feet; (chord hears S 57°45'31" E. 158.88 feet); thence S 43°59'56" E. 79,49 feet; thence along a curve to the right having a central engle of 34"3'0:" a distance of 203.58 feet (chord bears S 28°33'24" E. 205.37 feet); thence S 9°06'52" r. feet; thence along a curve to the richt having a central angle ofl•90 19°16'52" a distance of 233.88 feet (chord bears S 0°31'34" W, feet); thence S 10°10'00".u, 232.78 left.having a central angle of.15021'40t�atdista distance ofng a curvefeete the (chord bears S 2°29'11" W. 127,63 feet);;stance of 128.02 left having a central angle of 440 thence along a curve to the n8 09'39" a distance of 92.49 feet (chord bears S 27°16'28" E. 90.22 feet); thence along a curve to the left having a central angle of 16°55'08" a distance of 228.88 feet (chord bears S 57°48'52" E. 228.05 feet); thence S 65°40'31" E. a distance of 190.98 feet to the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. '/17/79 I --(f : The regular meeting of the Garfield County Board of Commissioners was held on Monday, September 17, 1979, beginning at 10:00 a.m. Present were Chairman Flaven Cerise, Commissioners Dick Jolley and Larry Velasquez, County Attorney Art Abplanalp and Deputy Clerk of the Board, Nancy Page. The Commissioners niet with John Van Gaalen and Frank Hess to discuss maintenance of the county's communication and television systems. Mr. Cerise told them that the county has been considering hiring one full tinie employee to maintain both systems rather than contracting the work out. Mr. Velasquez added that they had been under the assumption that John and Neil Van Gaalen no longer wanted the business. Mr. Van Gaalen assured the Board that this was not the case. Mr. Hess said that one person to handle both jobs sounds good, and that while there are some economies, it would be very expensive to set up a shop with necessary equipment and tools, plus the cost of vehicles, snow machines, over- head, salary, benefits. He also said that it would be very difficult to find a -qualified pian specializing in both television and communications. Mr. Velasquez said it seems it would be economical to have one person make one trip to Sunlight for repairs or maintenance. Mr. Hess said that he and Van Gaalens do cooperate where they can. After further discussion, it was determined that Mr. Hess is being hampered by a lack of communication wi th and cooperation from the Sheriff's Office. It was decided to have a meeting with the Sheriff to see how things could be \ nrked out. Bud Milner, Building.Official, introduced Jim Pta-c.Uttec ay�/his new assistant, who L)egan work today The preliminary plat for Horizons West Subdivision was submitted by planner Gary Dean, and owners Dotti, Jack and Lee Pretti. County Planner Ray Baldwin present. Mr. Dean e•:plained that they now have 55 lots instead of the original 49, primarily because they have to pave the roads and install underground utilities and their overhead will be greater. They are coordinating every- thing with the City of Rifle and have signed a pre -annexation agreement. The development will be phased, and Mr. Abplanalp questioned whether there should be a temporary cul-de-sac for the first phase since the road will not go all the way through to the county road. Mrs. Pretti said that by•thet ,4 ime they are ready to se!1 lots, they will not be using the existing corrals and will be able to put the road all the way through. Mr. Jolley moved that the pre- liminary plat for Horizons West be referred to the Planning Commission. Mr. Velasquez seconded the motion and it carried unanimusly. A'c unting Officer Barbara Brown told the Commissioners that Burroughs Corp. is offering a deal on a new computer that would be much faster than the machine she has now. The Commissioners asked if it had capacity for new she said no, that she would like to have the machine but would notrpushms fornd it. The Commissioners decided it would be better to wait and get a computer that could handle programs for other offices as well. Mr. Jolley moved that the minutes of the meetings of 9/4/79 and 9/10/79 as corrected. Seconded by Mr. Velasquez and carried unanimously. A public hearing was held for a mobile home special use permit for Mr. and Mrs. Fred Koster. They were not present, however, Assistant Planner Stephanie Andreasen said that all requirements had been niet and no protests have been received. The mobile home is to be located southwest of Grand Valley. Mr. Velasquez moved that the special use permit be approved. Seconded by Mr. Jolley and carried unanimously. Meeting recessed for lunch. Reconvened at 1:30 p.rn. A public hearing was held on the Spring Valley Sanitation District. Roll call was taken and all commissioners were present. Chairman Cerise read the pro- cedure to be followed during the hearing and then swore in witnesses. The following exhibits were accepted as evidence: Exhibit A, proof of publication of notice cf the hearing; Exhibit 8, the Spring Valley Sanitation District Ser- vice Plan. Attorney Lee Leavenworth summarized the plan, explaining that it will serve the Los Amigos development and Colorado Mountain College. John Hopkins, an engineer with bright McLaughlin, said that the existing facilities at CMC are at the saturation point and that the intention is to add to the facilities in stages as development occurs. They plan to dispose of waste water in the summer by sspraySirrigationcan nby percolation in the winter. Mr. Velasquez asked why Springs is not included in the district. Mr. Leavenworth explained that the management of Lake Springs has vacillated about being included because 2 .ey do not yet have county approval_ on their development, but once they are ,.0 -Ealy to go, they will annex into the_district. Pe -said l:hat fhe agreement wIl tip college is that the district will he proceeded with now, however. Mr. Velasqu.:,: said he is concerned with contamination of sub -surface water and feels that this district is important for the whole area. Mr. Hopkins said they are planning so that the plant can be expanded to handle development. Tom Bishop, of Hanifen Imhoff and Sanford, explained the planned financing for construction of the facilities. There will be two bond issues for two phases, and his firm has agreed to uncle nvrite the bonds. Any additional annexation will enhance the security. Mr. Velasquez asked how the board of directors is made up Mr. Leavenworth explained that five of the directors must be owners of real property within the district and the rest must live within the district but do not have to own property. They do have to be registered voters in the state. Mr. Abplanalp said that the Planning Commission has not reviewed this matter and he recommended that the hearing be tabled until they have an opportunity to do so. He also questioned Mr. Hopkins about the soils report, noting that rapid infiltration appears impossible. Mr. Hopkins assured him that infiltration is possible. Mr. Baldwin asked about the $4000 tap fees, saying that that amount would generate more money than is needed for construction. Mr. Bishop said that interest must be considered, and that as additional development is annexed, the fees would be lowered. Mr. Cerise asked for comments from the audience. There were none. Mr. Baldwin asked about the needs of the school district if they should build up there. Mr. Leavenworth said they have been taken into consideration. Mr. Velasquez moved to continue the hearing until October 1, 1979 at 1:30 p.m. in order to give the Planning Commission an opportunity to review the district. Seconded by Mr. Jolley and carried unanimously. A public hearing was held for a special use permit for an oil and gas well for Rio Colorado, represented today by Robert Peterson. Assistant Planner Stephanie Andreasen also present. Mr. Peterson said this well, located up South Canyon, will be drilled through coal for methane gas. Ms. Andreasen said the only problem is access - the bridge only allows 8 tons and the road over the hill is questionable. She felt that dust may be a problem fcr the residents of Riverbend, but Rio Colorado has agreed to provide a water truck. Mr. Cerise questioned the extent of their mineral right holdings and then stated that he would abstain from voting because there may be a conflict of interest due to the fact that he has holdings in the area. Mr. Jolley moved that the permit be granted but that it be held until Rio Colorado provides proof of access to the site. Seconded by Mr. Velasquez. Motion carried. A request for zone change was presented by Snowmass Coal for the Diamond S Ranch near Carbondale. Present were Richard Schmitz of Dravo Corp., the engineer, and Mike Clark, Terry Gunderson and Pete Craven. Mr. Schmitz said they are pro- posing permanent facilities that would allow them to load unit trains with coal from the Thompson Creek mine. They proposed to build a new 24 mile haul road from the county road to the Roaring Fork River across from the ranch, where the coal will be loaded into a tube conveyor that will take it to a 180 -foot silo for storage. A train track will be built on the ranch where the coal will be loaded onto trains twice a week. The silo will hold a little more than enough for one train. This will strictly be a storage facility. They would like to start construction in the spring and complete it by December of 1980. Mr. Cerise asked if the haul road would be paved and was told it would be. He asked if anything would be done to improve the county road. Mr. Clark said theyare con- sidering it. Mr. Velasquez asked if the road would be private, and if so, how woul d it be controlled. Mr. Cl ark said it woul d be, and that they woul d have gates and signs. Mr. Schmitz said that employees and maintenance equipment would come in from Highway 82. Mr. Velasquez asked what they would do with the coal if something happened to the conveyor. Mr. Clark said they would have to leave it at the mine. Mr. Velasquez asked about sludge. P•lr. Schmitz said the pond will evaporate but the solids will have to be hauled back to the dump at the mine. Mr. Abplanalp asked if they would be in for a permit if the zoning is approved. Mr. Schmitz said yes, and they would have an environmental impact statement pre- pared by that time. Mr. Velasquez asked how the rest of the ranch would be used and Mr. Clark responded that it could be used for grazing. There being nor- ther questions, Mr. Jolley moved that the zone change request be referred to the Planning Commission. Seconded by Mr. Velasquez. Motion carried. Mr. Cerise abstained because he owns some of the mineral rights Snowmass is mining. Bob DeRoeck requested a zone change on 5.81 acres near the Hardwick bridge and in the vicinity of the asphalt batch plant, gravel pit, and other industrial uses. He wishes to locate his crane service there. The commissioners felt that it certainly ties in with existing uses. Mr. Jolley moved that the request for a zone change from R/G/SD to A/I be referred to the Planning Conmrission. Seconded by Mr. Velasquez and carried unanimously.