Show Bonneville Irrigation Project So So That The People May Know KnowIn In order that there may be no mss mis misunderstanding understanding of my attitude regard regarding ing in any subject pertaining to any an v possible solution isolation of di Bonneville or that I intentionally would evade or I any question or issue involved and in order that the average dis dis 1 dis district triot member might be full fully advised as to the true legal status of the relative obligations obligation of the district members to the district and to the bond holders in such language thAt they will 11 understand I take this op- op op opportunity of explaining Attorney Peter opinion from the view point of a layman laman as I see sec it To a le legally ally trained mind the opinion of Attorney is clear and in point but is apt to be misunderstood by the average water user to illustrate he is very liable to assume tha upon his purchasing one bond and paying that bond to the district district as payment in full fun for toI I his indebtedness to the district assuming as assuming as- as suming sumin that he owes a one of the total obligations of the district i that he hc thereby there by releases his land of all obligations that assumption is not correct cor t that that particular bond would then become the property of the irrigation district and would not affect any other bond bond- bondin in any manner and no part of which would pay any part of or any other bond While it is true that in in this case the district cannot 1 1 it simply transfers ns rs the obligation from an obligation to the district district- into an obligation lessone to the bond holders less one of the total debt so paid b by him and the land landof of this member would still l be bc liable to the other f bond t holders on the obligation I for which there is still stilla a charge which may at any time be converted into a lien to sali satisfy fy which the e land lanti may be sold as in the case casc of Mac Mac- However MacLean Mac Lean vs St St Joseph Land Co How- How ever should ALL of the district members pay their t I obligations in fn FULL r f then this member would be relieved of obligations on the bond issue and not otherwise Referring to Section tion 20 chapter T 5 of chap- chap fr tr ter 80 Laws ws of utah 1929 quoted by v t the attorneys my opinion is that the l legislature desired i t inthe to assist in the solution of Boneville as much as their constitutional limitations would permit and is is my opinion they fully realized such limitations when they inserted the clause with interest int rest to maturity and in that I find noth noth- ing ing nothing retroactive or anything affecting any other bond holder in a anyway n a y Now if the district member berwa wants to t take the above risk at a cost to him of over 41 11 per cent over and above the total that amount it would cost him by my plan for the sole and sr only purpose of satisfying ing my opponents I will be perfectly satisfied in fact Bonneville anything to solve sol Respectfully submitted Heber J Steiner |