From The Pueblo Chieftain (Chris Woodka):
“We are unwilling to accept an implied obligation to pay for costs incurred by the county when our understandings were that, upon dismissal of the Pueblo West litigation, all parties would bear their own attorneys fees and costs,” John Fredell, Southern Delivery System project manager, wrote in an answer to Pueblo County commissioners this week.
Commissioners are seeking nearly $150,000 for litigation costs in reaching a settlement with Pueblo West that will lead to dismissal of the lawsuit. They maintain it was Colorado Springs’ job to gain compliance of all of its SDS partners with all of the conditions of a 1041 land-use permit. A 2008 agreement signed by Pueblo West authorized Colorado Springs to negotiate all permits…
In his response to commissioners, Fredell outlined the events that led up to the dispute. Colorado Springs was notified of the condition for all participants in SDS to comply with the flow program created in the 2004 intergovernmental agreement in January 2009, Fredell said. “Obviously, Colorado Springs was in no position to reject that proposed condition either for itself or for any of its participants,” Fredell said. After the full set conditions was presented in February 2009, Pueblo West expressed concern about the condition requiring compliance with the flow program in the permit. On April 16, 2009, Pueblo County issued the 1041 permit, and Pueblo West filed its lawsuit one month later…
Colorado Springs said nothing has happened that would trigger a dispute resolution clause of the 1041 permit, Fredell said. “We don’t believe that there has been a dispute between Colorado Springs and Pueblo County over the provisions of the 1041 permit that would have triggered the dispute resolution process,” Fredell said. He also said the settlement agreement itself has a provision that all parties would pay their own legal expenses.