Joint powers board hosts Corthell and King

The Saratoga-Carbon County Impact Joint Powers Board (SCCIJPB) met with two attorneys from Corthell and King, the Laramie based law firm selected last month by the SCCIJPB, during their July 8 meeting. At the same meeting, the reappointments of Chairman Richard Raymer and board member Roger Cox were confirmed and the election of officers was held.

Corthell and King

As was reported previously (see “Water, sewer board engages with attorney” on page 12 of the June 17 Saratoga Sun), members of the joint powers board had interviewed four different law firms to help in analyzing the joint powers board agreement between the Town of Saratoga and the Board of Carbon County Commissioners (BOCCC). Of those, it had been recommended by Raymer and SCCIJPB members Craig Kopasz and Russ Waldner to solicit the services of Corthell and King.

During that same meeting, it had been requested that the law firm appear at the July meeting of the joint powers board. On July 8, firm partner Erik Oblasser and associate Michael Bennett were in attendance to represent Corthell and King.

“The first part of our new adventure is for you guys to review the current joint powers board agreement between the Town of Saratoga and the (Board of) Carbon County Commissioners that forms this board,” said Raymer. “It was written in 1976 and, to our knowledge, hasn’t really been touched or revisited since. So, we don’t know that the language in there is good today as it was the day it was written or if it needs updated.”

Raymer added that he believed it was the consensus of the joint powers board that they would also like to see what recommendations Corthell and King would have regarding the agreement and the relationship between the Town of Saratoga and the BOCCC. Oblasser informed the joint powers board that it was important for there to be a set of bylaws, adding that the agreement was based on a statutory framework that saw little change.

“You don’t only work under one section, you work under various sections and if you don’t follow the minutes to make room or be within another section you can get yourself in trouble. So, the bylaws, that’s what we try to convey is really where the meat is,” said Oblasser. “For example, when having a public meeting and you have someone from the public come up; how do you give them a forum to speak. Those things are important because that is something that can make you guys liable. So, you want to delineate that process in the bylaws.” 

Following discussion about the importance of bylaws for the joint powers board, there was also discussion about the clarity of the agreement and whether changes in the numbering of the statutes could affect the strength of the agreement.

“There has been some question about the agreement in that whether the water system belongs to the joint powers board since they were formed and just what was expanded or the entire water system belongs to the joint powers board from the formation. So, I think that’s one thing that we need to get clarified in the agreement,” said Waldner. 

As was reportedly previously (see “BOCCC discusses intent of JPB agreement” on page 1 of the April 29 Saratoga Sun), Town of Saratoga legal counsel Tom Thompson had argued to the BOCCC that, under the original agreement, the joint powers board could only claim ownership over the extended portion of the water system. Thompson had also argued that the SCCIJPB was only entitled to water fees from the extended system due to the wording of the agreement.

Councilmember Jon Nelson, who serves as the Saratoga Town Council representative to the joint powers board, asked Oblasser and Bennett if the age of the agreement and reorganization of the state statutes could impact its strength. It was Bennett’s belief that the original joint powers agreement was drafted under the annotated 1956 statutes, adding that Corthell and King had those statutes and could alert the SCCIJPB if there was any material change following the 1977 revisions.

“If the legislature did revise the statute again next year, would there be a process that every joint powers board in the state would have to go through to maintain their status as a joint powers board or can that original agreement live through a statutory change?” asked Nelson.

Both Bennett and Oblasser clarified that a renumbering of the statutes constituted a change in codification and was not a material change. They added that the Wyoming State Legislature would have to specifically remove certain powers from the statutes to affect whatever power the joint powers board had.

“From reviewing your guys’ agreement … it still falls onto the statutory framework, so I’m not sure that we’re going to have to tweak it too much there,” Oblasser said.

Appointments and Election

Raymer, who had previously been appointed to the joint powers board by the Town of Saratoga, stated that he had been appointed by the BOCCC. Roger Cox, who had previously been appointed by the BOCCC, had been appointed by the Town of Saratoga. The switch in appointments came due to Raymer living outside of town limits while Cox lived within town limits.

Under officer elections, it was proposed that all officers retain their seats. Raymer remained Chairman, Kopasz remained Vice-Chairman and Waldner ramained treasurer.

The next meeting of the Saratoga-Carbon County Impact Joint Powers Board will be at 6 p.m. on August 12 at the Platte Valley Community Center in Saratoga.