The lawsuit filed by the Ashley Valley Water and Sewer Improvement District against Ashley Central Irrigation Company was among the topics discussed at a recent Q&A of candidates running for the 2 open seats on the Ashley Valley Water District board. The lawsuit claims that Ashley Central Irrigation Company is in breach of contract for a 1983 agreement that allows the District to purchase water for culinary use and that they would be assessed on an equal basis to the Company’s primary shares. During the Q&A, current President of the Ashley Central Irrigation Company, Wayne Simper, who is also running for a seat on the District board, read a statement from the Company’s lawyer. The statement said, in part, that “ the District’s lawsuit is misguided, premature, and represents a waste of the District’s resources” and that “the Company has NOT raised assessments. Let alone at 5X.” Incumbent candidates Brownie Tomlinson and Boyd Workman each responded. Tomlinson emphasized that he was part of the group that signed the contract in 1983 and it was agreed at that time that if Ashley Valley needs water, they could buy it. He said that since that time, the District has not been able to get what they want or accomplish their desire of buying water. He also stated that because Ashley Valley Water District gets its water at the springs and does not use the infrastructure of the Irrigation Company, that they should not be charged for piping the canals and the canals upkeep. Workman emphasized that the District has tried to negotiate but could not get anyone to talk to them. He said they would like to buy enough water to furnish the District’s system, needing 6 to 8%, and that they want voting rights. The complete statement read by Wayne Simper and a transcript of Brownie Tomlinson and Boyd Workman’s initial responses will be included with this news story on BasinNow.com. A ‘Politics & Pastries’ Meet the Candidate event with the Ashley Valley Water board candidates is being held on Thursday, October 9th at 6pm at Western Park.
Question Asked: Earlier this month, AVWSD filed a lawsuit against Ashley Central Irrigation Company for an alleged breach of contract of an agreement signed in 1983. Are you aware of this lawsuit and what is your opinion on this matter?
Wayne Simper(current President of the Ashley Central Irrigation Company) read the following statement:
- The District’s lawsuit is misguided, premature, and represents a waste of the District’s resources. There is no reason for this lawsuit as the District and its lawyer are mistaken on the law and the facts. The Company has repeatedly asked to sit down and discuss this matter with the District. In fact, the Company arranged a meeting to discuss all this in late April, and the District did not show up. They went dark.
- Next, the Company has NOT raised assessments. Let alone at 5X. Why the District jumped the gun here is unknown. But, to be clear, it certainly has been discussed. An increase in assessments for municipal and industrial uses of historically irrigation water is normal throughout the state and the west. There is nothing new or unique with the Company’s approach here. Utah law and the 1983 contract allow for differential assessments on an equitable (NOT equal) basis. Irrigation companies throughout our state, including the Uintah Basin, assess different shares differently.
- Lastly, the District has accused the Company of bad faith. That’s strange. The Company has done nothing more than stick up for its shareholders, and protect its water supply in the face of the District claiming more water shares than they actually have. The District did not even know what they had and did not have. This is what started all this.
- The Company is acting entirely within the law and in the best interest of its shareholders, and the community. The District and its lawyer has not done their homework. We think the case will be dismissed.
Brownie Tomlinson(incumbent AVWSID board member) stated, “I signed that contract back in 1983 with Ralph Walker being President of the Central…It was agreed upon at that particular time that when Ashley Valley needed water they could buy it. And to this point here, Central has made it inoperable to buy water stocks because we don’t have voting rights. They made it if we buy water we can’t have a voting right on it. And if you’re going to buy water and be part of the water source then the Irrigation Company, you should be able to vote upon what you are doing and how you are getting your water. Now with that said, since I signed this contract and Ralph Walker signed it, we have not been able to get what we want and accomplish what we desire of getting/buying water from them. Now this said, the water users of the valley (Vernal, Maeser, Ashley Valley, Jensen) only use about 5% of the total (unclear) water, we do not need to be charged for piping the canals or service of any other thing other than we are at the head of the water at the springs and we get the water there. We don’t have to have canal companies saying we don’t have their water(unclear) or we should be charged or pay for their upkeep.”
Boyd Workman(incumbent AVWSID board member and Chairman) stated, “The lawsuit is strictly the Canal company charged us over $200,000 for I guess legal work that they did on trying to get our water rights straightened out. [Corrected to $2000]. Then when we questioned it and didn’t want to pay it they said if we didn’t pay it they was going to sell our water shares so we went ahead and paid it under protest. So the lawsuit is about that $2,000 that we paid. What they did is they created a .05 latch (unclear)at Ashley Creek where our spring is and our pipe is. Ours and Vernal City water goes in a pipe right there and (unclear) we use absolutely 0% in any of the canal companies. All our water is put into our pipeline that we maintain and do. This $2000 is for maintenance on a pipeline that we don’t use or it’s in addition. We always pay. We paid $16,000 dollars last year for maintenance on a canal system we don’t use, which we’ve paid that for 40 years and we haven’t complained about that. I met with some of the Canal Company, I met with Dave Shivers, (unclear), and tried to negotiate and they said they would negotiate when we talked to them. They said they want 5 times the rate that everybody else pays and it’s non-negotiatable. So when they say we didn’t try to negotiate we did try and negotiate. We just couldn’t get anybody to talk to us. But we would like to settle. We would like to buy water and we’d like to have voting rights on it even though our rights would be 5% of the total. We do not want to own the canals. I don’t know if that statement was made. We’d like to buy enough water. We need like 6-8% to furnish our system and we’d like to buy it but so far we’ve been unable to get any negotiations on that. They just want 5 ½ times and that’s the end of the conversations. We’d like to negotiate some more.”
