PRIVATE PROPERTY ADMITTANCE AGREEMENT

PRIVATE PROPERTY ADMITTANCE AGREEMENT  (PPAA)

Please consider this signed agreement as permission granted to:
________________________________________________________Grantee
Address: __________________________________________________
Phone #_________________________________________________
To be admitted on the property of: __________________________________________Grantor
And to be confined to: _____________________________________________

Please check one of the following:  Private citizen_____Public Servant_____

If Private Citizen: Organization Affiliation ___________________________

(In addition to this agreement, Public Servant will be required to fill Public Servant’s Questionnaire pursuant to the Privacy Act of 1974, and attach to Grantor’s PPAA.)

1) Grantee accepts full responsibility for his/her actions while on said property, and thereby waives Grantor of any liability whatsoever.

2) Grantee agrees that he or she is a guest on Grantor’s private (includes allotment owner) property accepts burden of performance, and acknowledges any action not agreeable to (3).  

3) Authorizes Grantor opportunity to terminate agreement at any time .

4) Grantee does not have permission to share any activity (includes hunting, fishing, dirt moving) or material (includes land, water, structure, fauna, flora, photography, electronic image or video) they see, with any government, government agent, government contractor, representative, private entity, non-profit agent, non-government public organization or non-profit private organization.

5) Grantee must be aware and hold Grantor harmless of, certain hazards, both man-made and natural. These hazards may include, but are not limited to barbed and hot wires, sinkholes, water (river/creek etc.), livestock, domestic and wild animals, machinery etc. 

6) Grantee promises to: Notify Grantor prior to each time Grantee desires to enter property; exercise full consideration of this privilege granted; will be absolutely observant of keeping shut gates shut, not leave behind any material Grantee brings in; not remove any material from Grantor’s property; not intentionally bring damage to any part of the land, water, farm animals or livestock, and not move beyond area defined in agreement.

7) Grantee acknowledges they will not disturb any animals, living trees, shrubs, buildings, well sites, electrical sites etc. 

8) This agreement is non-transferable, and on a one-person only basis.

9) Grantee does not have authority to enter any building on property. 

10) Grantee must have agreement available to show Grantor or any person Grantor authorizes to request show of said agreement; if Grantee fails to show requested agreement, Grantor or Grantor’s authorized person will hold right to terminate this agreement and demand Grantee leave of property immediately.

Agreement start date:__________Agreement termination date:_______________

Signed (Grantee) ________________________________________________________________

Signed (Grantor) _________________________________________________________________

PUBLIC SERVANT QUESTIONNAIRE

Public Servant Questionnaire

This questionnaire must be filled-out by any public servant before he can ask the citizen any question.  This is authorized by federal law, including the Privacy Act, 5 U.S.C. 552a, 88 Stat. 1896, et seq., 1974.

1.     Public servant's full legal name:

2.     Public servant's residence address:

3.   Name of agency:

4.   Name of supervisor and office address:

5.   Will public servant uphold the constitution of the United States?

      Yes  No

6.   Did public servant provide proof of identity?

       Yes  No

7.   ID number:

     Badge Number:

     Bonding agency and number:

8.   Will public servant furnish a copy of the law or regulation that authorizes the action being taken or information requested in this case?

      Yes  No

9.   Will public servant read aloud that portion of the law authorizing the questions asked?

      Yes  No

10.  Are answers voluntary or mandatory?

      Voluntary  Mandatory

11.  Are the questions being asked based upon a specific law or regulation, or are they a discovery process?

12.  What other uses may be made of this information?

13.  What other agencies may have access to this information?

14.  What will be the effect upon me if I should not choose to answer any or all of these questions?

15.  Name of person in government requesting this information:

16.  Is this investigation general or special?

Note: by ‘general,’ it means any kind of blanket investigations in which a number of persons are involved because of geography, type of business income, etc. By ‘special,’ it means any investigation of an individual nature in which others are not involved.

17.  Have you consulted, questioned, interviewed, or received information from any third party relating to this matter?

      Yes  No

18.  If yes, give identity of all such third parties:

19.  Do you reasonably anticipate either a civil or criminal action to be initiated or pursued based upon any of the information which you seek?

      Yes  No

20.  Is there a file of records, information, or correspondence relating to me being maintained by this agency?

      Yes  No

21.  Is this agency using any information on me which was supplied by another agency or government source?

      Yes  No

22.  Will the public servant guarantee that the information in these files will not be used by any other department other than the one by which he is employed?

     Yes  No

---

            I hereby sign and affirm under the penalty of perjury that the answers are true and correct in every particular.

  _____________________________________

            Signature of public servant

Notice: If any request for information relating to me is received by any person or agency, you must advise me in writing before releasing such information.  Failure to do so may subject you to possible civil or criminal action as provided by this act or other law(s).

_____________________________________________

Official printable questionnaire:
 http://www.landandwaterusa.com/Property-Protection-Forms/Public-Servants-Questionnaire.pdf

DEMAND TO REMOVE PROPERTY REFERENCES

DEMAND TO REMOVE PROPERTY REFERENCES  Attention: ______________________________________ From: __________________________________________ I, the undersigned, am a Private Property Owner (Hereafter referred as Owner) whose properties may include deeded land, grazing allotments, certain permits, trademarks and agreements, animals, water shares, rights of way, easements, cattle trailways, gas oil and mineral rights, water/forage and other beneficial uses deemed legal, titled structures, airspace and business (Hereafter referred as Properties) located in the county(s) of _________________ in the state of _______________________________ It has been brought to my attention that through voiced intentions, public media, videos, maps, photos, prospectus, FOIA and other certain papers (Hereafter referred as Reports), ________________________________________   ____________________potentially in conjunction with nonprofit and for-profit affiliate organizations, and/or representatives (Hereafter referred collectively as Entity), has allegedly assumed and or is speculating use(s) for Properties, and other properties not owned by Owner but are nearby and or conjoining Properties to the extent use of could jeopardize Owner’s Properties. Because Entity did not seek written consent or permission from Owner for admittance on and or any use whatsoever of Properties, Owner considers Entity may have arbitrarily engaged in unlawful trespass. Entity’s alleged Reports have already harmed Owner by creating a nuisance that is needlessly- possibly intentionally - disturbing, violating, and encumbering rightful usage, creating a financial burden, and placing a cloud on Properties. As Owner whose Properties, income and business are now negatively impacted by Entity’s alleged Reports, I am providing this Demand to Remove Property References to serve as my formal demand: Entity must remove, erase and delete any and all references of Properties from any and all materials generated by, or utilized by Entity, potential affiliates or representatives (contracted or volunteered), within thirty (30) business days of receipt of this letter (Sent certified with return receipt.). In keeping with my State and Federal Constitutional rights to acquire, possess and protect my Properties, I, the undersigned as Owner, hereby demand Entity file a certified letter with the clerk and assessor in each before-mentioned County(s), clearly affirming that Entity has removed any and all references of Properties from any and all Reports Entity and his or her allied organizations have, within thirty (30) business days of receipt of this letter. Should Entity choose not to comply with Owner’s Demand to Remove Property References, Owner will exercise the right to remedy (includes liens and seizures), as may be appropriate and provided by law. Should Entity’s non-compliance result in Owner having to take action to remove Properties and Owner referencing from Entity’s Reports - starting at the expiration of thirty (30) business day period, Owner will exercise the right to remedy as may be appropriate and provided by law.  In this particular matter, Owner is not associated in any manner whatsoever with Entity or representatives, affiliates, and or family members of Entity. Owner has no knowledge of Entity’s specific plans or intentions. Therefore, Owner is to be held harmless and totally exempt from any liabilities whatsoever that may result, or have resulted from any representation whatsoever Entity (representatives, affiliates and or family members of Entity) may have made to any persons as pertains to Owner or Properties. Signed _______________________________________________________ Date __________________________ Cc: Governor, County Commissioners, County Sheriff, Interested Parties

Notary Seal

BILL ANTI-ENERGY ENTITIES FOR LOSSES

Gas Wells anywhere Colorado 

Colorado General Assembly Members and Governor Jared Polis who supported SB19-181, 

are on record for knowingly initiating 

"Takings Without Just Compensation."  

In 2018, Colorado Voters soundly defeated Proposition 112; a proposition presented by anti-energy entities, for a minimum distance requirement for new oil, gas and fracking projects. Colorado's Democrat House and Senate Majority, led by Democrat Governor Jared Polis refused Coloradans vote against 112,  by immediately forming SB19-181; a bill that would push forward anti-energy entities goal of crippling Colorado's Energy Production. 

SB19-181 Sponsors Senator Stephen Fenberg and Representative KC Becker, General Assembly Members who voted YES, and Governor Jared Polis who signed SB19-181 are on record for knowingly initiating "takings without just compensation."                                    
If you are a Gas, Oil and Mineral Rights Owner (GOMRO) who's been denied opportunity to exercise your property rights, and or are realizing a decrease in your royalties due to passage of SB19-181, please know that said "denial" and "royalty decrease" constitute the unlawful action of "takings without just compensation."                                                
GOMRO's were continuously approached by entities who expressed interest in lawfully "purchasing" Gas, Oil and Mineral Rights. But rather than trying to purchase GOMR's, General Assembly Members and Governor Polis deployed SB19-181 to seize (take without compensating) GOMR's.                                                                                                       
Bill supporters liked the fact that SB19-181 was rife with "interferences with property rights." Coloradans are now realizing negative economic impacts of SB19-181. Job losses, devaluation of GOM shares, denied use and physical invasions of private property are just some of the negative economic impacts.                                                                              
Bill supporters refused inclusion of, "Just Compensation" to Gas, Oil and Mineral Rights Owners, conjoining parties, community, County and Tribe.                                         
Because Governor Polis and General Assembly Members were made aware of the possible negative consequences of SB19-181, they charged forward anyway. Therefore, Colorado Property Owners can claim "Governor Polis and General Assembly Members who supported SB19-181, knowingly initiated takings without just compensation."           
GOMRO's, YOU have a right to seek remedy from those on record as responsible for your losses.         
Instead of bitching, name calling and whining, here's a real remedy suggestion: Quietly and politely send SB19-181 Yes voting General Assembly Members and Governor Jared Polis, a bill for your losses. Have your spread sheets available as back up proof of losses.  

___________________________________________________

Notice sent to Colorado General Assembly - March 3, 2019

Please vote  no on SB19-181.  

https://leg.colorado.gov/sites/default/files/documents/2019A/bills/2019a_181_01.pdf

STATE OF COLORADO INTRODUCED and gas mineral extraction areas, only if the Colorado oil and gas conservation commission (commission) has identified a specific area for designation. leg.colorado.gov

Our concerns highlighted: 

Right out of the chute, this bill violates  "Section 21 of article V of the Colorado Constitution requires that the subject matter of a bill be "clearly expressed in its title..." and that the bill contain only one subject. The title must also state the purpose of the bill. This means the title must accurately reflect the substance of the bill without being so broad as to violate the Constitution's single-subject requirement." ​

​

The subject > CONCERNING ADDITIONAL (more than one subject) PUBLIC WELFARE (ambiguous) PROTECTIONS (more than one subject) REGARDING 101 THE CONDUCT (ambiguous) OF OIL AND GAS OPERATIONS (too broad). ​

​

This bill is a list of new regulations; not a singular law. ​

​

"The bill enhances local governments' ability to protect public health, safety, and welfare and the environment by clarifying, reinforcing, and establishing their regulatory authority over the surface impacts of oil and gas development. Current law specifies that local governments have so-called "House Bill 1041" powers, which are a type of land use authority over oil..."​

This is redundant, for "local" - i.e. county -  government's already have such authority. What is the sponsors definition of "enhances?"​

​

If the bill sponsors were sincerely concerned about (II)  THE MINIMIZATION OF ADVERSE IMPACTS TO PUBLIC HEALTH, 23 SAFETY, AND WELFARE, they would enforce preexisting laws that require CDOT and Union Pacific to maintain their easements. ​

​

Additionally, because there are no inclusions respective of honoring and exercising of "preexisting" Gas Oil and Mineral Rights, SB 181 is in reality, a gross violation of private property rights... known in our Colorado State Constitution as "Takings without just compensation." ​

​

A better bill, a single subject bill, would be a: "Full Disclosure of Gas, Oil and Mineral Rights;"  a bill concerning full disclosure of Gas, Oil and Mineral rights by property sellers. Seller must disclose the existence of "preexisting Gas, Oil and Mineral Rights" that may be exercised at any time and are within say 1 mile of property to be sold. Upon purchase of property, buyer waives any rights they may or may not have to sue, protest or otherwise disrupt Gas, Oil and Mineral owner rights to exercise.  Seller's failure to disclose would result in appropriate penalties...​

State of Colorado Constitution

Article V Legislative Department 

Section 40. Bribery and influence in General Assembly. If any person elected to either House of the General Assembly shall offer or promise to give his vote or influence in favor of or against any measure or proposition pending or proposed to be introduced in the General Assembly in consideration or upon condition that any other person elected to the same General Assembly will give or will promise or assent to give his vote or influence in favor of or against any other measure or proposition pending or proposed to be introduced in such General Assembly, the person making such offer or promise, shall be deemed guilty of solicitation of bribery. If any member of the General Assembly shall give his vote or influence for or against any measure or proposition pending in such General Assembly, or offer, promise or assent so to do, upon condition that any other member will give or will promise or assent to give his vote or influence in favor of or against any other measure or proposition pending or proposed to be introduced in such General Assembly, or in consideration that any other member hath given his vote or influence for or against any other measure or proposition in such General Assembly, he shall be deemed guilty of bribery; and any member of the General Assembly, or person elected thereto, who shall be guilty of either of such offenses shall be expelled, and shall not be thereafter eligible to the same General Assembly; and, on conviction thereof in the civil courts, shall be liable to such further penalty as may be prescribed by law.

Article V Legislative Department

Section 43. Member interested shall not vote. A member who has a personal or private interest in any measure or bill proposed or pending before the General Assembly, shall disclose the fact to the house of which he is a member, and shall not vote thereon.

Article IV Executive Department

Sec. 11. Every bill passed by the General Assembly shall, before it becomes a law, be presented to the Governor. If he approve, he shall sign it, and thereupon it shall become a law; but if he do not approve, he shall return it, with his objections…(and so on). 

*In 1922, in the most historically important taking decision,1 the Supreme Court extended the availability of takings actions from government appropriations and physical invasions of property, as described above, to the mere regulation of property use. This critical expansion of takings jurisprudence to “regulatory takings” acknowledged that purely regulatory interferences with property rights can have economic and other consequences for property owners as significant as appropriations and physical invasions.