August 24, 2015

To:

Commissioner Phil Lyman, Chairman

333 South Main
Blanding, UT 84511-3816
plyman@sanjuancounty.org

Mr. Kendall Laws, Esq., County Attorney

P. O. Box 850
Monticello, UT 84535-0850
sjattorney@sanjuancounty.org

Commissioner Rebecca Benally

P.O. Box 9
Monticello, Utah 84535-0009
rmbenally@sanjuancounty.org

Mr. Walter Bird, Esq., County Employee

P.O. Box 9
Monticello, UT 84535-0009
walterbird@sanjuancounty.org

Commissioner Bruce B. Adams

P. O. Box 748
Monticello, UT 84535-0748
bbadams@sanjuancounty.org

Mr. Greg Adams,

Planning and Zoning Commission Staff
P.O. Box 787
Monticello, UT 84535-0787
gregadams@sanjuancounty.org

Mr. Shelby Seely, County Assessor

P.O. Box 787
Monticello, UT 84535-0787
sseely@sanjuancounty.org

Utah Attorney General Sean Reyes

350 North State Street, Suite 230
Salt Lake City, Utah
84114-2320

Mr. Kelly Pehrson,

Commission Administration
P.O. Box 9
Monticello, Utah 84535-0009
kpehrson@sanjuancounty.org
From: Summit Wind Power, LLC
4733 Hiddenwoods Lane
Murray, Utah 84107
(801) 712-6789
ERRATA
On or about August 5, 2015, Summit Wind Power, LLC (Summit Wind) filed a formal
complaint with San Juan County (the County) and state officials. Summit Wind has since identified a
few typos that it now seeks to correct. Most importantly, Summit Wind contended that Latigos
Conditional Use Permit expired no later than January 5, 2013. This should state January 5, 2014. This
typo does not affect Summit Winds arguments or change the fact that Latigos Conditional Use Permit
1

is long-expired. A few other editorial changes were made to increase readability that do not change the
content of the document. Summit Wind submits this document as an errata and replacement to Summit
Winds previously filed formal complaint. As stated herein, Summit Wind also includes the San Juan
County Planning Commission Minutes from July 5, 2012 (attached hereto as Ex. 17). All other exhibit
numbers and orderings remain the same.
FORMAL COMPLAINT AGAINST LATIGO WIND PARK PROJECT, LLC,
COMMISSIONER BRUCE ADAMS, AND GREG ADAMS
In June 2012, Summit Wind Power, LLC (Summit Wind) planned to begin digging holes for
geological surveying in San Juan County (the County). Various County officials, including Greg
Adams, the Planning Commission staff secretary, and Bruce B. Adams, Commissioner of the County
Board of Commissioners, advised Summit Wind that construction in the County first required permits
granted by the County Planning Commission and the County Commissioners, including (1) a conditional
use permit (CUP) and (2) a building permit (BP). These officials directed Summit Wind to review
the County Zoning Ordinance and the CUP Instructions and Application on the County website. They
also gave Summit Wind a three page BP self-carbon copy document. Later, they also said that two or
more parties could not maintain a CUP or BP for the same purpose on the same parcel of land. These
officials told Summit Wind that if Summit Wind were to proceed with construction activities without
valid permits that the County would shut Summit Winds operation down.
In contrast, Summit Wind has recently discovered that Sustainable Power Group (S*Power)
bought Latigo Wind Park Project, LLC (Latigo) and has begun construction activities in San Juan
County, Utah without valid permits. This construction without valid permits constitutes continuing
violations of the San Juan County Ordinance and laws. These officials have given no explanation for
why they treated Latigo more favorably than Summit Wind.

Apart from construction continuing without valid permits, Summit Wind is also concerned that
County officials are not requiring Latigo to fully comply with County ordinances and laws. Summit
Wind believes that County officials may have interests in Latigo that conflict with their official duties.
These interests have also likely influenced their lack of enforcement with respect to Latigo. They have
failed to disclose these interests. If true, this is also a violation of the law.
Summit Wind respectfully requests that the County immediately require Latigo, as it has
required of other applicants, to undertake a proper permit approval process that complies with the
County Zoning Ordinance and other federal, state, and local laws.
Summit Wind is also forwarding this complaint to the Utah Attorney General and the County
Attorney asking that they investigate potential criminal conduct.
I.

LATIGO DOES NOT HAVE VALID PERMITS.

According to Latigos own public declarations, Latigo has begun construction on its wind park
project. See S*Power Fact Sheet (attached hereto as Ex. 1). Latigo does not, however, have the
necessary permits to do so.
A. Latigo Does Not Have a Valid Conditional Use Permit.
1. Latigos Conditional Use Permit Irregularities.
On July 5, 2012, the County approved Latigos application for a conditional use permit. See
County Planning Commission Minutes of 7.5.13 2 (attached hereto as Ex. 17). There are numerous
irregularities with this permit. See Latigo 7.18.12 Conditional Use Permit Application (attached hereto
as Ex. 2).
First, Latigos application states that it was not submitted until July 18, 2012 by Latigo manager
Christine Watson Mikell.1 Nevertheless, Greg Adams reviewed the application for the Planning

ChristineWatsonMikellwaspreviouslyemployedasanengineerbytheStateofUtahEnergyOffice.Asdiscussed
below,shehaslonghadassociationswithCommissionerBruceAdams.

Commission, which was somehow granted on July 5, 2012two weeks before the application was
signed and submitted by Ms. Mikell on July 18, 2012. See Latigo 7.18.12 Conditional Use Permit
Application.
Second, in order to obtain a County CUP, Latigo was required to meet the following instructions:
A statement of agreement . . . if you are leasing or renting the land for which you are
requesting the conditional use permit. The statement should clearly verify that the owner
of the property is aware of, and in agreement with the use which you are proposing in
your application for conditional use permit. THIS STATEMENT MUST BE SIGNED
BEFORE A NOTARY PUBLIC. The application will not be processed if this
statement of agreement is not provided.
Conditional Use Permit Instructions (attached hereto as Ex. 3) (emphasis in original).
These statements of agreement are important to protect San Juan County landowners. Latigo did
not submit these statements of agreement. Consequently, the County should never have issued Latigo a
CUP. And the County must require that Latigo submit an application that includes these statements of
agreement for their site plan. To comply with the County Ordinance and the law, the County cannot
allow construction to continue without these statements of agreement for all lands included in its project.
Third, Latigo made unilateral changes to its site plan map without Commission approval. In fact,
the County did not grant S*Power or Latigo the approval necessary to change almost all of its wind
turbine locations pursuant to its July 2012 site plan. Compare Latigos First Approved Site Plan Map
(attached hereto as Ex. 4) with Latigos Second Unapproved Site Plan Map (attached hereto as Ex. 5).
Fourth, Latigos CUP maps have little resemblance to Latigos site plan map sent to PacifiCorp2
and used by PacifiCorp to undertake system stability studies. See Latigos Site Plan to PacifiCorp
(attached hereto as Ex. 6). These studies are important so that PacifiCorp can determine the effects of
the project on PacifiCorps entire electrical transmission system. This should be of great concern to the
County because PacifiCorps electrical transmission system runs through the County and services

PacifiCorpistheparentcompanyofRockyMountainPower.

thousands of County residents. In fact, PacifiCorps last critical substation on PacifiCorps Utah
network is Pinto Substation, just outside of the Monticello city limits. And, the County fully relies on
PacifiCorp conducting accurate studies so that the County does not incur those costs and has the
assurances that the Countys electrical system is stable and reliable.
Fifth, Latigos First Approved CUP maps show a 4.9 mile radial transmission line. Latigos map
to PacifiCorp shows a 4.5 mile radial transmission line. The substation location in the two maps is also
different. Compare Latigos Site Plan to PacifiCorp with Latigos First County Approved Site Plan Map
and Latigos Second Unapproved Site Plan Map. As explained above, even small changes can cause
problems to the electrical transmission system network if not correctly studied.
Sixth, it is now clear that Latigo has submitted different maps to PacifiCorp and the County. The
PacifiCorp map states that Latigo requires a transmission line that will connect to the Pinto substation.
See Latigos Site Plan to PacifiCorp. Latigo does not have the easement rights to cross these lands. It
cannot use this route without those landowners consent. Therefore, Summit Wind believes that Latigo
is relying on PacifiCorps transmission line easements already on some of these lands. But it is not fair
to landowners that Latigo piggy-back PacifiCorps easement rights, without landowner consent, to avoid
paying these landowners for that additional usage. In any event, Latigo must identify its routes to
protect the landowners.
In the end, Latigo is submitting fraudulent maps to PacifiCorp or to the County. In either event,
this will affect County landowners and residents. County residents deserve to know what is really going
on and to rely on the County to make sure that it has accurate documents.
2. Latigos CUP Is Expired.
Mr. Greg Adams, cousin to Commissioner Bruce Adams, signed Latigos CUP on behalf of the
County. Mr. Greg Adams, however, cannot make unilateral changes to the CUP. A CUP extension

must be granted by the County Planning Commission. Even if it is granted, Section 6-9 expressly
limits a CUP to no more than 1 years with an extension without substantial action under the CUP.
Indeed, the County Zoning Code states:
Unless there is a substantial action under a conditional use permit with [sic] one (1) year
of its issuance, the permit shall expire. The Planning Commission may grant one
extension up to six (6) months, when it is deemed in the public interest.
San Juan County Zoning Ordinance 6-9 (attached hereto as Ex. 7).
As set forth below, Latigos CUP is now expired.

Latigos CUP was granted on July 5, 2012. See Latigo 7.1.12 Conditional Use Permit
Application (attached hereto as Ex. 2).

On October 4, 2012, the County Planning Commission amended Latigos CUP requiring a 1
kilometer setback for the project. See County Planning Commission Minutes of 10.4.12
(attached hereto as Ex. 8). Latigo never requested, nor did the Planning Commission grant,
any extension of any kind.

There is no record of Latigo taking any substantial actions under its CUP, as required by San
Juan County Zoning Ordinance 6-9.

Consequently, on July 5, 2013, Latigos CUP expired.

On July 29, 2013, Latigo belatedly requested a six month extension, erroneously citing
October 4, 2012 as the date its CUP was granted. This is not correct. As explained, above,
Latigos CUP was granted on July 5, 2012. The County Planning Commission simply
supplemented Latigos CUP on October 4, 2012 without the request or approval for an
extension. See 7.29.13 Stoel Rives Law Firm Latigo Letter to Greg Adams (attached hereto
as Ex. 9).

Even assuming that Latigos dates are correct, and they are not, the application for extension
was never heard or granted by the Planning Commission. Furthermore, the Planning
Commission never made findings that an extension was in the public interest as required
under the Ordinance. See San Juan County Zoning Ordinance 6-9.

Even assuming that the extension was heard and granted, the Planning Commission cannot
grant an extension beyond 6 months. See San Juan County Zoning Ordinance 6-9.

Thus, Latigos CUP, granted on July 5, 2012, expired on July 5, 2013.

At best, if Latigo properly sought an extension, and it did not, such an extension could not
have exceeded six monthsor January 5, 2014.
6

According to S*Power, Latigo did not even begin Site preparation or Groundbreaking
until July 2015. See S Power Fact Sheet (attached hereto as Ex. 1).

Even with the most favorable calculation, Latigos CUP is 1 years overdue. No one, including
Latigo, can construct in the County without valid permits.
B. Latigo Does Not Have a Valid Building Permit.
There are at least four failings with Latigos building permit.
First, the San Juan County Zoning Ordinance states that a building permit application is granted
[f]ollowing the issuance of a conditional use permit . . . . San Juan County Zoning Ordinance 6-8.
As explained above, Latigos CUP expired no later than January 5, 2014. Nevertheless, the County
approved Latigos building permit on February 3, 2014. See Latigo Building Permit 2.3.14 (attached
hereto as Ex. 10). This was not proper and a violation of the San Juan County Zoning Ordinance.
Second, Latigos BP was signed by County Commissioner Bruce Adams. See Latigo Building
Permit 2.3.14. The County has told Summit Wind that Latigo was not required to submit signed
engineering plans for its BP. This is not consistent with how the County has treated other BP applicants.
Third, Latigos CUP is not consistent with Latigos BP. For example, the wind turbines are of
different models and produced by different manufacturers. And, this is different still from what Latigo
presented to PacifiCorp. In fact, Latigo told PacifiCorp that it was going to use a Clipper Liberty Series
Turbine, which is what PacifiCorp used on its studies. In contrast, S*Powers own fact sheet now says
that it is using a GE wind turbine. See S*Power Fact Sheet. Which wind turbine is it?
Fourth, County residents expressed concerns over wind turbine noise. In response, Latigo then
used a particularly quiet Siemens turbine for its noise study. But, as explained above, Latigo is not
using the Siemens turbine. Latigo is now using a GE wind turbine, which has not been studied either by
PacifiCorp or the County for this project. See S*Power Fact Sheet. Latigos noise study is unreliable.

Fifth, the County is not fairly administering its permit requirements. On one hand, the County
has required applicants to provide engineering drawings signed and stamped by a licensed Utah
engineer. It appears the County failed to require this of Latigo. As explained elsewhere, the County
also failed to require Latigo to provide signed statements of agreement for the landowners of its
proposed project when securing its CUP. This, independently, is a violation of the County Conditional
Use Permit Instructions (attached hereto as Ex. 3).
II.

THE COUNTY ATTORNEYS OFFICE SHOULD INVESTIGATE SAN JUAN

COUNTY OFFICIALS.
A. San Juan County Commissioner Bruce Adams Has Failed to Disclose Conflicted
Interests and His Ties to Latigo and/or S*Power.

San Juan County Commissioner Bruce Adams is required to, through a filed sworn statement,
disclose his substantial interests in (1) any business entity subject to regulation of the county, and (2)
any personal interest or investment which creates a potential or actual conflict between his personal
interests and his public duties. Indeed, Utah law states:
Interest in business entity regulated by county -- Disclosure.
Every appointed or elected officer who is an officer, director, agent, or employee or the
owner of a substantial interest in any business entity which is subject to the regulation of
the county in which the officer is an elected or appointed officer shall disclose the
position held and the precise nature and value of the officers interest upon first becoming
appointed or elected, and again during January of each year thereafter during which the
officer continues to be an appointed or elected officer. The disclosure shall be made in a
sworn statement filed with the county legislative body. The commission shall report the
substance of all such disclosure statements to the members of the governing body or may
provide to the members of the governing body, copies of the disclosure statement within
30 days after the statement is received. This section does not apply to instances where the
value of the interest does not exceed $2,000, and life insurance policies and annuities
may not be considered in determining the value of the interest.
Utah Code Ann. 17-16a-6 (emphasis added).
Investment creating conflict of interest with duties -- Disclosure.
Any personal interest of or investment by any elected or appointed official of a county
which creates a potential or actual conflict between the officials personal interests and

his public duties shall be disclosed in open meeting to the members of the body in the
manner required by Section 17-16a-6.
Utah Code Ann. 17-16a-8 (emphasis added).
On April 29, 2014, a GRAMA request produced zero disclosure forms submitted by
Commissioner Bruce Adams. See GRAMA Disclosures (attached hereto as Ex. 11). It is difficult to
believe that Mr. Bruce Adams or Greg Adams have no possible conflicts requiring disclosure,
particularly with Latigo and/or S*Power. In fact, Summit Wind has reason to believe that
Commissioner Adams and/or his family have landowner and/or ownership interest in the Latigo Project.
For example:

Commissioner Adams was previously affiliated with the renewable energy entity Utah
Green Power. During this time he was directly affiliated with Latigos manager, Christine
Watson Mikell who, interestingly enough, worked for the State of Utah Energy Office and
erected the Monticello wind towers for the state of Utah. See 2.19.04 Wind Power Meeting
(attached hereto as Ex. 12). GRAMA responses for wind data obtained during Ms. Mikells
tenure with the state reveal that this data is lost and no longer available. This is in contrast
to the coincidence that Latigos wind project sits on one of those state meteorological tower
sites.3 Commissioner Adams must disclose these and other relationships he has through Utah
Green Power, Latigo, S*Power, and any other possible conflicting relationship.

Commissioner Bruce Adams is related to the owners of Redd Enterprises and Jones
Enterprisesthe primary landowners in the Latigo project.

Infact,thewholepointoftheFebruary19,2004WindPowerMeetingwasfortheCityofMonticellotoobtaina
granttoerectameteorologicaltowertocapturewinddata.MonticellopaidWasatchWind,Latigospredecessor,toerect
thetowersandtoanalyzethewinddata.Thishappenedin2006whenMs.MikellwasthePresidentofWasatchWind.This
meteorologicaltowerisevidentinLatigosownunapprovedsiteplanmap.SeeLatigoSecondUnapprovedSitePlanMap
(attachedheretoasEx.5).Afterthedatawascollected,however,Ms.MikellrefusedtogivethedatatotheMonticello
untilyearsafteritwascollectedandwas,bythen,useless.

Mr. Greg Adams, the County official authorizing Latigos invalid CUP, is Commissioner
Bruce Adamss first cousin.

Mr. Greg Adamss brother Robert Rob Adams currently works for S* Powerthe entity
that recently purchased Latigo.

Commissioner Bruce Adamss home is located on Latigo Loop. See Adamss Home
(attached hereto as Ex. 13). Summit Wind is interested in discovering why the Latigo Wind
Park Projects name is the same name as the street were Commissioner Adams resides.

Recent investigations, revealing potential fraud surrounding the Latigo project, also play into
these conflicts. The now Chapter 7 bankrupt Renewable Energy Development Corporation (REDCO)
(Case No. 11-38145) held a $250,000 option to purchase the Latigo project. See Champlin Docs
(attached hereto as Ex. 14). REDCO insiders, including Michael Adams, Commissioner Adamss
brother, was an owner and Vice-President of REDCO. Robert Adams, Commissioner Adamss first
cousin, was the REDCO project development manager. Like many other REDCO insiders, Robert
Adams now works for S*Power. So it is no surprise why the $250,000 option to purchase the Latigo
project was never disclosed in the REDCO bankruptcybecause it is a very valuable project. In fact,
according to public statements by the REDCO insiders and S*Power management, the Latigo project is
worth $136 million. See 8.4.15 S*Power Website (attached hereto as Ex. 15)4; see also San Juan
County Record Article (attached hereto as Ex. 16).
None of these relationships have been disclosed. And, given that Greg Adams, Bruce Adamss
first cousin is tasked with processing the Countys permits, it is no wonder that the Latigo construction
continues despite invalid permits.

http://www.spower.com/news_2015/news20150701.php

10

Commissioner Bruce Adamss connections to this project are simply too many to not find a
conflict.
B. San Juan County Officials Have Failed in Their Duty.
As explained above, County officials have repeatedly failed to substantially perform their duties
relative to Latigos CUP and BP. Utah law repeatedly requires public servants to perform duties
inherent to their office:
Official misconduct -- Unauthorized acts or failure of duty.
A public servant is guilty of a class B misdemeanor if, with an intent to benefit himself or
another or to harm another, he knowingly commits an unauthorized act which purports to
be an act of his office, or knowingly refrains from performing a duty imposed on him by
law or clearly inherent in the nature of his office.
Utah Code Ann. 76-8-201.
17-16-10.5. Failure to perform duties constitutes malfeasance in office -- Felony
charges arising from official duties -- Paid administrative leave -- Reassignment of
duties.
(1) The failure of an elected county or prosecution district officer substantially to perform
the officers official duties constitutes malfeasance in office under Section 77-6-1.
Utah Code Ann. 17-16-10.5
County officials should be investigated for both failures in their duties and failures to
disclose conflicts. These officials should also be required to recuse themselves from any further
Latigo matters and any future matters regarding any type of wind project in the County. County
attorneys should also investigate possible violations of the following:

11

Utah Code Ann. 76-8-201 (Official misconduct)

Utah Code Ann. 76-8-103 (Bribery or offering a bribe)
Utah Code Ann. 76-8-105 (Receiving or soliciting bribe or bribery by public servant)
Utah Code Ann. 76-8-504 (Written false statement)
Utah Code Ann. 76-10-1603 (Unlawful acts)
Utah Code Ann. 17-16-10.5 (Failure to perform duties constitutes malfeasance in office)
Utah Code Ann. 17-16a-6 (Interest in business entity regulated by county Disclosure)
Utah Code Ann. 17-16a-8 (Investment creating conflict of interest with duties Disclosure)
Utah Code Ann. 17-16a-10 (Violation a misdemeanor Removal from office)
Utah Code Ann. 71-16a-12 (Recession)

Sincerely,
Kimberly Ceruti
Member of Summit Wind Power, LLC

12