Letter: Ginn opponent responds | VailDaily.com
YOUR AD HERE »

Letter: Ginn opponent responds

Frank Lorenti, Minturn
Vail CO, Colorado

April 11 was quite the day for writing letters to the editor about Frank Lorenti, and I wasn’t even invited to the letter writing party.

That’s OK, because now it gives me the chance to give more facts to the citizens of Minturn.

So here I go.

Letter one: “Opponent of Minturn project lacks credibility”:

“If he expects that the town is going to use my tax dollars to hold this vote then it is a reasonable question and he needs to answer it.”

First; Please read Ordinance 10, Article 1. Annexation and Zoning of the Property, Section 1.1

In the event of a legal challenge, Ginn agrees to reimburse the town for all costs, expenses, and attorneys fees incurred in defense thereof. A “legal challenge” shall mean the following:

(b) the submission of a valid petition under the municipal code for a referendum seeking to reverse or nullify any of the Ordinances or Resolutions.

What I did was submit a valid referendum petition, (legal challenge), and brought it before the council. Minturn Town Council then decided to send it to a vote. Town Council approved Ordinance 10, so by them spreading this myth that this democratic voting process will cost the town money is immoral and unethical.

Secondly, do not forget that the council said we could vote on this issue and then refused to let us vote.

Letter two: “Need better Minturn coverage”:

“It has been proven that the proponents of the referendum have been playing fast and loose with the facts.”

CHALLENGE THEM! Challenge town council members.”

Not sure what facts I am playing with, all my facts are backed up with ordinances, newspaper articles, and reliable information. I welcome questions and this letter should serve as proof that I am up to the challenge. If someone else would like to challenge the Town Council, I would welcome it.

While I like to hear everybody’s opinion, and I appreciate the fact that you have a second or third home in Minturn, please remember that us Minturn citizens who will have to walk with our children on Main Street will have to deal with all the dangerous traffic everyday. If they move the toxic waste it will be closer to our town and our children, and the smell from the sewer plant will not be pleasant. We will not have the option of going back home to Denver, and only dealing with these problems a couple times a year. We will deal with them for 20 years, 24/7. Second-home owners deserve a say, but at the same time we will be living with your decision every day and you will not. Every resident in Eagle County will feel the impact of this. Red Cliff, for one, is not happy with the traffic plan.

Letter three: “Outsider’s view of Ginn deal”:

“Mr. Lorenti says the town will lose water rights. The agreement clearly states the town will get their water rights plus more water rights.”

I never said we would lose our water rights. We will provide him with water service using our water rights.

Annexation is the simplest way for Ginn to secure water for his development. Under terms of a court settlement, if Minturn can show a need for its unused water rights, it can reclaim them. All the water in the area is allocated, so he could face serious obstacles trying to buy water elsewhere. Taken from AP, July 7, 2005.

This is from Ordinance 11, Exhibit A Water Service Agreement, Recitals:

C. Ginn entities seek water service directly from Minturn for a portion of the project (“water service”). Minturn agrees that it will provide water service to the project pursuant to this agreement to the extent allowed by the town water rights (as defined in Recital E), the town’s augmentation water rights (as defined in Recital G below), and any additional water rights provided to Minturn by Ginn entities. With respect to water rights provided to Minturn by the Ginn entities, Ginn will have the first right to use the water for irrigation purposes or other project purposes on the Ginn Property.

G. In Case No. 05CW262, other water users have challenged Minturn’s ability to use the decreed Minturn water system ditch and the decreed well rights to provide water service for town growth or the project.

There is a lot of interesting reading in Ordinance 11. Water rights are a very valuable commodity, and can be a very big legal issue.

Hopefully I have answered those three letters to everybody’s satisfaction, with facts that are indisputable from ordinances approved by the Town Council and signed by the mayor of Minturn.

Once again, I appreciate the opportunity to clarify and give facts on a very important issue for Minturn, and the county, and our environment.


Support Local Journalism


Start a dialogue, stay on topic and be civil.
If you don't follow the rules, your comment may be deleted.

User Legend: iconModerator iconTrusted User


Trending - News


See more