| OCR Text |
Show IRfcatfer dssvncv vo waitf ruling bevore sealing Dennis ftfiovv After two lengthy meetings last eek concerning the seating of Dennis lott on their board of trustees, the shley Valley Water and Sewer Im-rovement Im-rovement District (AVWSID) decided ) wait for a judge's ruling on the matter efore action is to be taken. At the regular district meeting Wednesday of last week, Dr. A. Gaylon ook made the motion that Mott be sated on the board immediately, arry Hacking, who was sworn in as a sard member Monday of last week, Jconded Cook's motion. Questioning the motion, Lee osenhan, district board trustee, said i felt the board should wait on seating lott until District Attorney Gayle IcKeachnie finished researching the latter as allowed in a ruling last week om Judge David Sam, Fourth Jdicial Court. Judge Sam ruled that Mott be given a irtificate of election, which states that J was the highest vote getter in the 3ard election last December, but it esn't solidify for Mott a position on ie board. Mott's Qualifications to serve as a sard member are being questioned in ght of a paragraph in the resolution forming the district made by the Uintah County Commissioners in 1974 which stipulates that no more than two district trustees can be from one precinct. Since the board is already represented by two members from Mott's precinct, he has been given 60 days to qualify. To obtain a declaratory statement on Mott's qualifications for candidacy, Mott filed suit three weeks ago in the Fourth District Court. Judge Sam's ruling last week was in reply to Mott's suit. In his ruling Judge Sam gave the district until Monday, Jan. 11, to voluntarily seat Mott on their board or continue with the suit. Supporting Rosenhan's suggestion, Trustee Brownie Tomlinson said he would "stand here till my dying days and not seat Mott until legal council says we are right to do so." "Let's hold to the decision we started out with," Tomlinson added, "that is to seat Larry (Hacking) and if in 60 days Mott qualifies he will be seated. I don't see the urgency in seating Mott." Hacking said he felt there were personal feelings involved in not seating Mott. Responding to Hacking's charge, Rosenhan and Tomlinson explicitly stressed that they had nothing personal against Mott being seated, but wanted their action to be totally legal so that they could never be contested in court. After further discussion of Cook's motion, the board voted three against and two in favor of not seating Mott until receiving legal council. Casting rescinding votes were Robert Turner, board vice chairman; Lee Rosenhan and Tomlinson. Lee Rosenhan then made a motion that the board wait until the board hears from their attorney before making a decision to seat Mott. Rosenhan's motion passed Tomlinson, Rosenhan and Turner in favor and Cook and Hacking opposed. Rosenhan said that he is tired of being misquoted and misconstrued so people think he is against Mott. "Everything I do or say is colored or tainted to be against Mott, because I am hanging onto this seat," Rosenhan said. Rosenhan is continuing to serve on the board of trustees in Mott's seat even though his term ended at the first of the (Continued on Page 2; Mott seating - - - (Continued from Page 1) year because Utah Code stipulates he is to serve until his term expires or until a successor qualifies for the seat. If after 60 days a successor doesn't qualify, the county commission will choose a successor. At a special noon meeting last Saturday, the AVWSID heard the opinion of their attorney concerning seating of Mott on the board. About 20 people were at the meeting supporting Mott being placed on the board. After a lengthly discussion of who authorized the district's attorney to investigate the Uintah County Commission's Com-mission's action Monday of last week to rescind the district's resolution allowing no more than two board members from each precinct, Gayle McKeachnie read to the board portions of the Supreme Court case Tygeson versus Magna Water Company. The conclusion of that case is that when an agency is formed, which is what the Uintah County Commission did in forming the district, the governing body ceases to have jurisdiction. Based on this case, it was McKeachnie's opinion that a court of law would hold that the county commission com-mission had no authority to change the resolution after the district was formed. for-med. Richard C. Davidson, deputy Uintah County Attorney, who was at the meeting, contested McKeachnie's opinion saying that in Section 17-5-19 of the Utah Code, the County Commission is given power to supervise other political subdivisions. "Certainly this must include water and sewer improvement districts as they are a child of the county commission," com-mission," Davidson said. "Implicit in this grant of authority must be the power to correct improprieties im-proprieties found in the supervision of such districts," Davidson said. Davidson also questioned the power of the county commission to make the stipulation in the first place. "The imposition of the rule as embodied em-bodied in the resolution imposes an additional qualification upon the right of an individual to run for this office which is not contained in the Utah Code," Davidson said. The county attorney, Clark Allred, differs in opinion with the deputy county attorney saying the County Commission's action amending the resolution creating the AVWSID was "improper and void." First the open meeting act was not complied with, in that notice should have been given before such a resolution was passed. Second, the matter should have been on the agenda, and third, "it is my opinion that the County Commission does not have the power nor the right to be involved with water districts, nor to Lake any action that will affect or interfere with those districts, including the amending of the resolution creating the districL" Another perspective, said McKeachnieat the meeting, is the state has a 55 mile per hour speed limit w hich cannot be contested by going to the county, but through the courts. McKeachnie said that a multimember multi-member district, which the county set up is legal, but whether the county has the power to set them up, "we haven't decided." "Once is is set up, the initiating body has no power to change it," McKeachnie said. "If anybody has the power to change the resolution, the board (AVWSID) does," McKeachnie said. McKeachnie also mentioned other problems in the election brought to his attention by an associate in his law firm, John Magnum, doing the research on the problem. For a write-in candidate to qualify for election, he must take an oath of election, which Larry Hacking didn't take. Also according to state law, Brownie Tomlinson's seat on the board should have been up for election last December. These problems can be cured in time because of a 40 day limit for protest after which both Hacking's and Tomlinson's seal on the board can't be contested, but Mott's problem cannot be cured with time, McKeachnie said. If Mott participates in a bond election, elec-tion, the sell of the bonds could be delayed until the court cleared Mott, McKeachnie said. Acting on their attorney's opinion that the AVWSID could change the resolution, Cook made a motion to rescind the resolution which bars Mott from qualifying. Larry Hacking seconded Cook's motion. Tomlinson, Turner and Rosenhan opposed the motion and it didn't pass. Lee Rosenhnn then made a motion to wait on a declaratory judgement from Judge David Sam on whether to seat Mott and that the board would abide by the judge's decision. Rosenhan's motion passed by a three-vote majority. Hacking and Cook opposed the motion. Cook then moved that the bills which i the district would pay should be itemized before the board's approval that thry be paid. He requested that the 1 district's attorney itemize his hours before the board would npprove the bill I and also requested that Lylc McKeachnie, former board chairman, submit an itemized accounting of his ' Inst bill for December nnd a week In |
