One of the issues on tonight's agenda pertained to the lawsuit filed by Yellowstone Valley Electric.
The City/ECP does have legal council; Gerald Murphy of Moulton, Bellingham P.C. from Billings. He, as well as City Attorney Dave Gliko, feel that naming ECP in the suit is fairly superficial, because in the "prayer for relief" portion of the suit, claims were made against SME only.
Stuart Lewin, local attorney, indicated that ECP should get their own attorney and ask Mr. Murphy if he has a conflict of interest. He read portions of the Assignment and Assumption Agreement between the City of Great Falls and ECP:
6. The Parties desire to enter into this Agreement through which all of the City’s right, title, and interest in and to the SME Contract is assigned to Electric City and Electric City agrees to assume ll of the City’s duties under the SME Contract, all as more fully provided herein.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing, the mutual promises of the parties, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, the parties hereto agree as follows:
1. Assignment. The Seller hereby assigns, transfers and conveys to the Buyer the rights, benefits and privileges of the Seller under the SME Contract.
2. Assumption. For and in consideration of the assignment hereunder, the Buyer hereby accepts the foregoing assignment and hereby assumes all of Seller’s rights, obligations, interests and liabilities under the SME Contract to the same extent as though it had originally been named as a party thereto and agrees to observe, perform and fulfill all the terms and conditions of the SME Contract.
It is Mr. Lewin's contention that because of this agreement, the ECP board could find themselves at odds with the City Commission. He also feels that Coleen Balzarini's position could present a huge problem for the city, because she seems to "wear many hats". (Ya think!) Who does she represent, the City or ECP?
Chairman Golie felt that Mr. Lewin was confused with the terminology in the agreement; that buyer means ECP customers, not ECP.
I guess Mr. Golie (who, by the way, is a member of the ECP pilot program) didn't read the agreement from beginning to end, because if he had, he would have known that seller = City of Great Falls and Buyer = Electric City Power, Inc.
The board did not take any action on this issue.
The board did not take any action on this issue.
There's more to report so stay tuned.
13 comments:
Why does the City even need counsel? It's not a party to the suit?
First Golie thinks he is a professional engineer, now he's an attorney extraordinaire. What's next?
Laughable but sad. These are the people driving the bus off the cliff.
George golie is one who said he is not receiving below cost power while proving he is so completly ignorant he has no idea what the economics of ECP is.
George golie (a good friend of bill bronson, watch them sit together and laugh it up at meetings)is completly self serving and could care less what an idiot he proves himself to be.
Is george golie really the "best" and "brighest" of what the local union has to offer?
ECP has no money to hire an attorney. All costs must be covered by the city.
Is the city paying for the attorney a way to keep legal costs of the books of ECP?
ECP is NOT a member of SME. The City of Great Falls is the SME member and Ms. Balzarini (somehow) is the cities de facto representative (voting) authority at the SME monthly closed meetings. Where she gets her authority and orders from and who she reports too would be interesting to know.....
Gregg, please read the A & A agreement and you will see that the city is the SME member and therefore is involved in the lawsuit against SME. We (citizens) do need competent legal representation......
Ok, if ECP is the City's alter-ego (not an indefensible position by any means), then why do we need another lawyer? How is there a conflict of interest between the City and the City?
What does the city attorney do? He let this unfold on his watch.
Gregg,
ECP is a separate corporation for one thing. I agree it is somewhat attached at the hip to the city. the A & A Agreement defines each agency's responsibilities. I repeat that ECP is not a member of SME. The city retains that membership. Ms. Balzarini's role as a paid city employee and still representing the City, ECP and SME really confuses the situation and may be a conflict of interests. It is quite a mess and the lawsuit will be interesting to follow. I only hope that the citizens do not get screwed any further. Also, the customers of ECP should be very concerned as I read the A & A Agreement terms.
Anonymous 3:40 PM
The city is supposed to set the rates of ECP customers to keep ECP solvent and has fallen down on their duties and caused the taxpayer to subsidize the customers of ECP.
ECP does no even yet realize that they are BANKRUPT and in violation of city ordinace and their own law!
Let's stay on point here, folks. I agree with almost everything you say about the tangled relationship between the City and ECP and SME.
What I don't understand, though, is why the City supposedly needs to go out and hire an attorney to represent it right now when it hasn't even been sued?
Gregg's comment:
"What I don't understand, though, is why the City supposedly needs to go out and hire an attorney to represent it right now when it hasn't even been sued"?
Is ABSOLUTELY CORRECT. As near as I can tell it is ECP who is being sued not the city. The Yellowstone Valley Cooperative may have gotten it wrong and sued the wrong entity thinking that ECP was the SME member as Ms. Balzarini the ECP Executive Director attends all SME meeting and votes (somebody's directive). I can understand the confusion with this tangled mess and Yellowstone probably needs to amend their suit to name the city as the city is the member of SME who sends Ms. Balzarini to SME meeting to vote. ECP did nothing to harm SME it is the city whom may have voted to harm them by voting to remove them from the SME corporation. We do not know that for sure because we do not know how she voted, that is just one of the very many secrets the city keeps from their public and apparently the city commissioners!
Also, Ms. Balzarini's position on the ECP is not even called for in the bylaws of ECP, so where is the authorization creating her position on ECP?
Another lawyer is another hole in the dike to bleed money from. How many fingers are left?
At what point with the genieouses who blovieated proudly of their "leadership" get real?
Ignorantia juris non excusat.
Post a Comment