OBP005157

From: SELF, JEFFREY D

To: AGUILAR, DAVID V; COLBURN, RONALD S; (b) (6)
Subject: FW: Columbus Wall
Date: Wednesday, February 06, 2008 3:29:41 PM
Attachments: (b) (6)

Chief,

This on e is heating up. Bingaman is not happy with the condemnation of the CCC
property. I don’t know if you recall but this was an issue we were dealing with even
before SBI stood. CCC has failed miserably to negotiate in good faith. At one point
they were asking for about (b) (4) piece of property.

We will track.

Jeff

From: (b) (6)

Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2008 1:54 PM
To: GIDDENS, GREGORY; SELF, JEFFREY D; (b) (6)
Subject: FW: Columbus Wall

Just received this follow-up from Bingaman’s office – at this point, do we need to defer these questions
to DOJ since the court action has already been filed? What information can/should I be providing to his
office?

Thanks,
(b)
(6)

From: (b) (6)

Sent: Wednesday, February 06, 2008 12:24 PM
To: (b) (6)
Cc: (b) (6)
Subject: FW: Columbus Wall

(b) (6)

We are very concerned that CBP is unnecessarily moving toward commendation in this case
—it appears (see below that a compromise was reached on the two remaining issues (it isn’t
about money). My boss was assured by both the Secretary and the Commissioner that
condemnation would only be used as a last option (and I believe Senator Bingaman will be
calling to voice his concern about the way this is being handled). Why not just finalize the
deal? It makes absolutely no sense to us why the government would rather go to court, create
lots of bad press, and anger the local community when it is no necessary. This has been a
long process and we realize the government wants to begin construction, but the government
is also responsible for much of the delay. Our office has worked with both CBP and local
land owners to ensure that issues are addressed in an acceptable manner to both parties.
Please take a look at this case and urge CBP to just finalize an agreement rather than go to
court. Thanks.
OBP005158

(b) (6)

From: (b) (6)

Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2008 2:25 PM
To: (b) (6)
Subject: Columbus Wall

(b) (6) .
On Thursday, January 31 at 11:04 a.m. I received a call from (b) (6) of the
Army Corps requesting a meeting with me on Tuesday morning, February 5th to
discuss the Offer to Sell Real Property. In our discussion, it appeared that we
had reached an agreement on the two remaining points.

He sent me this email on Friday at 12:31:

From: (b) (6)

Sent: Friday, February 01, 2008 12:31 PM
To: (b) (6)
Subject: RE: Columbus

(b) ,
(6)
This is to confirm our meeting in your office at 201 E Main St. at 9:00 AM on Tuesday Feb 5th?

Request reply.

(b) (6)
(b) (6) Real Estate Division
Albuquerque District
U.S. Army Corps of Engineers

I responded with the following on Friday at 2:21:

From: (b) (6)
Sent: Friday, February 01, 2008 2:21 PM
To: (b) (6)
Subject: RE: Columbus

(b) (6)
I look forward to seeing you on Tuesday morning. As we discussed on the
telephone, I believe we are in agreement on the final two issues:

1) both the government and Columbus Cattle Company have the right to maintain the
barbed wire fence that will be constructed by the government and
2) the government will provide us with written assurance that the wall to be
constructed will be the “Post on Rail with Mesh Fence” that was agreed to by (b) (6)
.

Thank you.
(b) (6)
OBP005159

Yesterday morning at 9:36 he sent me the following email with the Offer
to Sell that is attached to this email:
From: (b) (6)
Sent: Monday, February 04, 2008 9:36 AM
To: (b) (6)
Cc: (b) (6)
Subject: Offer to Sell

(b) ,
(6)
Attached is the proposed Offer to Sell that I plan to bring to you tomorrow. I've added a paragraph on
the front page to identify that we can both perform maintenance on the fence. See if you agree. I'm
working with DHS to provide the assurance of the initial fence type, but that needs to come from them.
I made the changes in red, so take a look. I also cleaned up the last page - acceptance by the
government, also in red.

You can change the purchase price the same as before - pen & ink.

See you tomorrow.

I called him and discussed the fact that there was no mention in the Offer
that the Government had previously agreed to construct a 4 strand
barbed wire fence on the northern boundary of the property. He said that
should be in the separate letter we received from DHS.

I then sent him the following email yesterday at 10:51 with the latest
letter we had from DHS (See attached) that has no mention of the barbed
wire fence.
From: (b) (6)
Sent: Monday, February 04, 2008 10:51 AM
To: (b) (6)
Subject: CCC letter of intent.pdf - Adobe Reader

(b) (6),
Attached is the last letter we received from DHS. There is no mention of the barbed
wire fence.
(b) (6)

(b) (6)
immediately responded with:

Thanks, I'll see what I have.

Today (Tuesday February 5th ) (b) (6) and I met at my office as planned.
Rather than bringing me the proposed Offer to Sell he presented me the
attached letter notifying us that he plans to begin Condemnation
Proceedings.
OBP005160

(b) (6)
I will call you so that we can discuss the condemnation letter.
Thank you again for your help.
(b) (6)

(b) (6)
(b) (6)
(b) (6)

(b) (6)
(b) (6) FAX
email: (b) (6)