In light of the recent motion for hearing regarding the organization of the Elizabeth 86 Residential Metropolitan District, I come before you today to ask that you reconsider and/or repeal the prior resolution (10-58) from September 2010 which approved the service plan of this district. My reasoning is as follows:

1. A metropolitan district, by definition in the Colorado Revised Statutes has to serve the public's interest. Based on our recent experience with metropolitan districts in which Mr. Nyquist and Ms. Miller were involved (summer of 2011), the full disclosure of the scope of the metropolitan district involved in that situation was not forthcoming, but rather only became apparent after many public meetings and much discussion. If fact, Commissioners Schwab and Shipper, Planning Director Miller and Planner Carlson all told me in direct conversation well after the plan was withdrawn, that they were not aware of Mr. Nyquist's plans to pump water from Elbert County outside the county to satisfy other entities' water needs . It is difficult to understand how Mr. Nyquist was serving the public's interest in that instance....and consequently, how this situation will be any different.

2. A metropolitan district, per state statute, also needs to show financial viability. Documents presented to the Commissioners from Curtis Carlson in a letter dated Sept. 16, 2010 recommending approval of the service plan indicated that Clifton Gunderson had reviewed the financial projections and found them to be reasonable assumptions. However, a similar review by a company engaged by the town of Elizabeth, Coley/Forrest (a copy of which accompanies this document), found a different outcome. To summarize, they felt that the working assumptions made by the Metropolitan District were not accurate and overstated future revenue due to some double counting, overly aggressive sales per square foot assumptions for future retail outlets and inaccurate tax collection assumptions due to assuming that 100% of sales would be taxable--when in fact there would be sales that are tax exempt (for instance prescriptions). Keep in mind that Clifton Gunderson is the accounting firm that missed the million dollar mistake by the Elbert County treasurer just a few short years ago, which the county is still repaying. The city of Elizabeth chose not to move forward with this project, so it was presented to the county.
Citing the experience of our most recent dealings with Metropolitan Districts in which Mr. Nyquist and Ms. Miller are involved fresh in our minds, it would seem the prudent path to take would be to rescind or reconsider the previous approval which Commissioners Schwab and Shipper made . The legal resources I have consulted indicate that it is within the realm of the Commissioners to reopen the process, take testimony about the issue and consider a repealing resolution striking your previous finding. I personally am very concerned that you have not been proactive, knowing that Mr. Nyquist and Ms. Miller, in the past, have proven that their primary interest is not necessarily to protect Elbert County's water . This item should already have been on your agenda for review and reconsideration; therefore I ask you to reconsider, gather more input from the citizens you represent, and rescind your approval of resolution 10-58 until these issues are resolved .
Regarding the Elizabeth 86 Residential Metropolitan District
Case No. 2010CV288
"Commercial Metro District"
Case No. 2010CV287
"Residential Metro District"
At the February 22, 2012 BOCC meeting Planning Director, Richard Miller, read into the official record, a letter from one of Karl Nyquist's lawyers. The intent of the letter was to allay fears that Nyquist's scheduled Court hearings are not just the tip of more shenanigans to come. While technically the court cases are part of setting up a Metropolitan District process - an old saying comes to mind, "fool me once shame on you, fool me twice, shame on me." Only a fool would trust anything Nyquist does at face value.
PDF's of the petitions for Nyquist's court hearings - if you really like wading through legalese -
The Letter:
------The Background ------
------ The Foreground ------
Then later, at that same BOCC meeting Jill Duvall (ECOGIG) read the following pertinent statement into the official county record ( Underlining is mine - Publisher ):
------ The Playground ------
I predict that the Commissioners will delay, stall, and do nothing until it's too late to do anything proactively to correct the mess created by a general lack of due diligence; or until citizens get fed up and sweep them out of office. Or they are recalled - still a totally viable option. -- Mike