Rooney Valley News

 

 

You can’t make this up.  After a grueling 4 + hours, at the very end of the meetingTuesday night (April 13), Director Hanagan announced that she and Counsel Timmons met with the lead plaintiff (CDN/Big Sky) and the lead attorney, Charles Norton the day before (Monday) . . . to discuss settlement.

 

 

Without approval and direction voted on by a majority of of the elected board.  Without any notice to any other elected board members.  

 

 

The two of them just decided by themselves that they would represent the district without considering the fact that there are actually 5, not just 1, elected citizens to serve as the board of directors for the Green Mountain Water and Sanitation District.  

 

 

 

Counsel Timmons defended their action by stating Director showed “great leadership” in meeting alone, in conflict with the rest of the elected board . . . without approval by a vote of the majority . . . without mentioning it to the rest of the board . . . “great leadership”

 

 

On the controversial issues, the Green Mountain Water and Sanitation District is now run by two people.  Director Hanagan and Counsel Timmons.

 

 

On the controversial issues, the District has counsel representing one board member against the majority.  The majority, who speak for the district, have no legal representation.

 

 

Counsel Timmons further argued that “anyone on the board or any two of the board members can meet with the plaintiff and anyone else they want to”, including other counsel.  Yet for over a year she has angrily admonished board members not to speak with other residents or counsel.   And isn’t that one of the themes of the litigation.  The developer plaintiffs punish citizens and board members for board members talking to their constituents about the issues, two at a time, but its ok if the board members talk to the non-resident developers, two at a time.  Kinda goes along with the developer plaintiffs’ avoidance of public hearings and preference for election night agreements.   And Counsel Timmons doesn’t see anything wrong here.

 

 

Even the most basic function – providing a review and check and balance on spending – in this case Counsel Timmons’ fees – was met with openly hostile personal attacks by Director Hanagan and Counsel Timmons against Director Plotkin and, during a previous attempt to address spending,  Director Morgan.  Questioning spending by the District was described by Director Hanagan as a personal attack against Counsel Timmons.  Counsel Timmons did not dispute Director Hanagan’s position.

 

 

Toward the end of the meeting, Director Baker had to remind Counsel Timmons who she worked for and ordered her to stop interrupting other directors from speaking.

 

 

But at the end of the discussion on Counsel Timmons’ fees, Director Hanagan and Counsel Timmons succeeded in bullying their way through to force the majority to abandon their request (and fiduciary duty)  to review the expenses.

 

 

That is the backdrop that the board now finds itself in as it prepares to decide how to resolve the litigation.  As Director Hanagan stated during her personal public meeting on March 30, 2021, the board is fractured.   No kidding.  

 

 

And the plaintiffs are not only enjoying this but likely had a hand in making it happen.  Plaintiffs’ counsel, Mr. Norton is very close to Adam Paul who has openly criticized the decision to terminate the IGA in 2019 and worked behind the scenes to undermine the board (see blogs on emails disclosed regarding Adam Paul’s communications with former directors and then city attorney Cox).

 

 

Christopher Arlen, a previous candidate for Lakewood City Council, Ward 4, also closely associated with Adam Paul,  no doubt would like to be appointed to the Green Mountain Board if a board member resigned.  Mr. Arlen has threatened to recall Director Plotkin.   During the public comment Mr. Arlen first lamented the fracture, and in the same breath drove the wedge even deeper by demanding Director Morgan resign.

 

 

Note that from watching the zoom meetings, it appears that Director Hanagan usually reads from a script during the meetings.  Tuesday night she read from a script typed during the meeting which contained part of the bylaws.   When asked by another director to keep reading to the relevant part of the bylaws, she couldn’t because whoever sent her the excerpt didn’t include that part.  Her spontaneous reading of the statement was related to providing Mr. Arlen an opportunity to speak outside public comment.  When the zoom meeting chat function was used in prior meetings Director Hanagan frequently read Mr. Arlen’s written chat as her own words.  It appears Mr. Arlen is emailing or texting scripts for Director Hanagan during the meetings.

 

 

Director Hanagan is openly encouraging residents to file CORA requests against other directors.  At her solo public hearing she announced, as the plaintiffs have claimed, that Directors Plotkin and Baker are “anti-development”.  The plaintiffs claim that is why the Big Sky IGA was terminated.  Directors Plotkin and Baker have made clear that is not accurate.

 

 

Counsel Timmons by her own admission is overwhelmed.  She brought in two attorneys to help her.  The trial date was continued to August 16 and the discovery cut off is June 28.  The  plaintiffs have taken most of their depositions, including Directors Plotkin and Baker.  Notably Counsel Timmons has protected Director Hanagan from being deposed.  But Counsel Timmons has not taken any of the depositions of the most important witnesses for the plaintiffs.

 

 

Typically both sides take depositions to press their case through the other side’s witnesses – to demonstrate the weaknesss in the other side’s case, and to find out what the other side’s witnesses will say at trial.  Plaintiffs have.  Counsel Timmons has not.   The plaintiffs know she hasn’t.  They know she isn’t ready for trial.

 

 

It is a “dirty secret” in the world of trial attorneys that if an attorney doesn’t like to try cases or is so overwhelmed they can’t be ready to try a case, it is easier for the attorney to beat up on the client to persuade them to accept the other side’s settlement proposal than it is to advocate the client’s position to the other party.     It would be truly unfortunate if that was the case here.

 

 

So where does that leave the board.   They have an important decision to make:

 

 

1. Do they want to provide service outside the district.

 

2.  If they want to provide service outside the district do they want to do it through inclusion.

 

3.  If they want to provide service outside the district do they want to do it through an IGA.

 

 

Director Hanagan said that after her solo meeting with the head of CDN/Big Sky and the plaintiffs’ attorney, that we should be scared of them, they “really mean business”, “they are very nice people”, they think they can win millions from the district and “they don’t want us to demand inclusion”.

 

 

1. Director Hanagan and Counsel Timmons have stated in no uncertain terms that they want to provide service outside the district.

 

 

2.  Director Hanagan and Counsel Timmons have stated in no uncertain terms that they want to provide service through an IGA.

 

 

Maybe providing service outside the district is the right thing to do.  Maybe an IGA is the right way to do it.

 

 

But the majority of the board would like to hear from you before they make that decision.

 

 

No one asked your opinion May 8, 2018, when plaintiffs’ counsel Mr. Norton had the prior board sign the Big Sky IGA.  If nothing else, your current board, or at least the majority, fought to give you a seat at the table.  Now is your opportunity – the last time before they make a decision.

 

 

Here is a summary of some of the issues and a new option that was prompted by questions from a member of the public.

 

1. Do you want to provide service outside the district.

 

Fact – Since the developer plaintiffs are all outside the district boundary, there is no obligation to provide service.  Green Mountain does not have to give a reason for saying “no” to providing service outside the district boundary.

 

Fact – There are several other ways for the plaintiff developers to obtain sewer, including obtaining service from the sanitation district for their own territory – Mt. Carbon.  (See:

 

Big Sky/Cardel Homes/Three Dinos v. Green Mountain Water and Sanitation District – The Board is Listening and About to Decide – What Do You Think

 

 

Fact – Rooney Valley will probably be developed sometime one way or the other.   No matter what Green Mount does, they will either promote development in Rooney Valley (providing service) or inhibit development in Rooney Valley (not providing service).

 

 

2.  Inclusion – including the new developments inside the district boundary

 

– Green Mountain (publicly accountable sanitation district) controls the distribution of sewer service to Rooney Valley

– Green Mountain professional staff run, operate and maintain that the system (paid for by new and old residents just as is the case now)

– new residents get to vote

– new residents eligible to be taxed

– new system built under direction of Green Mountain but paid for by the developer and ultimately the new residents – not the current residents

– old residents share control of Green Mountain with the new residents

 

 

3.  IGA (intergovernmental agreement)

 

– Developer controls distribution of sewer service in Rooney Valley (at least until the board is a majority of new residents) – no public accountability

– developer employees run, operate and maintain the system (at least until the board is a majority of new residents and discover they own a sanitation district and system that requires professional staff)

– current residents do not share control of Green Mountain with new residents

–  new residents are never part of the Green Mountain district (can’t vote or be taxed)

– developer and ultimately new residents pay cost of constructing the new system (just as with inclusion, current district residents do not pay for new system).

– May 8 IGA and Solterra IGA have Green Mountain designing the new system, monitoring construction of the new system and reserving the right to come in and take over if there is a spill or contamination

 

 

Here is another option:

 

4.  IGA with Mount Carbon – not the plaintiff developers

 

– Mount Carbon is a sanitation district

– Mount Carbon is accountable to the public

– Mount Carbon has a professional staff of sanitation providers

– the plaintiff developers are already in the Mount Carbon district territory

– the plaintiff developers took themselves out of the Mount Carbon sanitation district but can return

– it would be up to Mount Carbon to design and monitor a new system

– it would be up to Mount Carbon to provide emergency assistance in case of a spill or other event

– it would be up to Mount Carbon with its professional staff to run, operate and maintain the new system

– the IGA would simply be an agreement with another established sanitation district to share the pipe

 

 

Here are a couple of other thoughts and news:

 

Water

 

Several residents have expressed concern about the impact of this new system on the limited supply of water.   Think about it.  We drink a very small percentage of the water we receive.  Most of it is used to process waste.  Here is an excerpt from an EPA document:

 

 

 

Providing sewer service (waster water), will by definition require the use of a lot of water.

 

 

To be sure, the water is not coming from Green Mountain (Denver Water).   But where is it coming from.

 

 

Denver Water said they wouldn’t provide it.

 

 

Solterra’s developer, Brookfield paid (and then the residents paid) over $1o million  to bring water in from Consolidated.  Through those same pipes, Consolidated has already agreed to provide water to Rooney Valley.

 

 

Where does Consolidated get their water.   Consolidated is a private stock company whose shareholders are its customers.  It is a very private organization.  The only meetings open to the public are its annual shareholders’ meeting.

 

 

About 10% of the water for Consolidated comes from Denver Water. But since Denver Water will not supply water to Rooney Valley, all of the water for Rooney Valley  comes from the clear creek watershed.   The water is then stored in primarily two locations – the Welton Reservoir and the Smart Reservoir.   Until Consolidated bought it, the Smart Reservoir was named Rocky Flats Lake.

 

 

To be sure, according to Consolidated, Rocky Flats Lake (now Smart Reservoir) and Welton Reservoir, despite their proximity to Rocky Flats, are not in the surface water watershed for Rocky Flats.   And, according to Consolidated, since the reservoirs are sealed, the risk of ground water seepage from Rocky Flats is minimal.  According to Consolidated, the water is tested for radioactive contamination at least every 6 years.  The most recent testing (2019 and 2020) shows the water is safe to drink.

 

 

Consolidated appears to be  transparent about where the water comes from, the extent of its testing and that it is safe to drink:

 

 

 

 

Water Quality

 

https://www.cmwc.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/CMWC-Water-Quality-Report-2019.pdf

 

https://www.cmwc.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/02/474738_20200127__CONSOLMW_20200131.pdf

 

https://www.cmwc.net/wp-content/uploads/2020/01/CMWC_MAPLE-GROVE-PWSID-CO0130020-Drinking-Water-Schedule.pdf

 

 

And, if Denver Waste is willing to take in this water, any risk of it running through Green Mountain’s pipes as wastewater  appears to be similarly minimal or non-existent.

 

But it is important to recognize  there is a lot of water involved and it is important to keep track of what’s in the water that will be going through Green Mountain’s pipes on to Denver Waste.

 

 

Bandimere

 

Bandimere race track property is about to begin development.  The last public rendition of the proposed development showed numerous condominium units.

 

Here is the notice of the public hearing on April 26, 2021.  No formal application has been filed yet.  The “here” link below takes you to the county file for the application.  It is updated as more information becomes available.

 

“VIRTUAL COMMUNITY MEETING NOTIFICATION

 

 

Bandimere is part of the Big Sky IGA proposed expanded territory even beyond the expanded territory that went beyond what was approved by Lakewood in 2016:

 

 

Green Mountain Map Overlay

 

 

It appears that Bandimere will be requesting sewer from Green Mountain as well as the plaintiff developers.

 

 

The key decision will be made by the board, probably soon after the public hearing on Tuesday, April 20, 2021.  This will be your last chance to let the board know what you think.

 

1. Should Green Mountain provide sewer service outside its district boundary.

 

2.  If it should, should it be by inclusion

 

3.  If it should, should it be by an IGA with Big Sky and the developers

 

4.  If it should, should it be by an IGA with Mount Carbon, a publicly accountable sanitation district with sanitation staff established to provide sanitation services for Rooney Valley, including the plaintiff developers.

 

Here is the zoom notice for all the meetings.  I will update this blog when the agenda is posted.

 

“VIRTUAL MEETING: Jefferson County Public Health COVID Enforcement Division has provided direction for public, indoor meetings under CDPHE’s COVID Dial 3.0 (in effect as of March 24, 2021) – on April 9, 2021, due to worsening COVID metrics, JeffCo moved to a more restrictive Level Yellow. Therefore, the District will offer the means of participating in this meeting by a video/conference call. To attend, please go to
https://zoom.us/j/99390363271
Or call +1 669 900 6833 and enter the Meeting ID.
Meeting ID: 993 9036 3271
To troubleshoot issues with connection at the time of the meeting, please follow this link
https://support.zoom.us/hc/en-us/sections/200305593-Troubleshooting
If you still experience issues, email customerservice@greenmountainwater.org and our IT staff will assist
you as soon as possible.
The District does not discriminate on the basis of race, age, national origin, color, creed, religion, sex, sexual orientation or disability in the provision of services. People with disabilities needing reasonable accommodation to attend or participate in a District Board meeting can call (303) 985-1581 or email customerservice@greenmountainwater.org for assistance. Please give notice as far in advance as possible so we can accommodate your request.”

 

Let the Directors who haven’t already made up their mind know what you think:

 

Here are the board’s email addresses:

adrienne.hanagan@greenmountainwater.org

jeffrey.baker@greenmountainwater.org

alex.plotkin@greenmountainwater.org

rhonda.peters@greenmountainwater.org

karen.morgan@greenmountainwater.org

 

 

John Henderson

(Disclaimer – This blog is solely my work and does not attempt to represent the position of the Green Mountain Water and Sanitation District or any individual member of the District.  The Board was not aware of and did not have an opportunity to review this blog.  I have been asked on occasion to provide advice and counsel to the board on a pro/bono basis but this blog, again, is independent of any consulting role I may have provided in the past.  All of the information contained in the blog is based upon public information or analysis independent of any consulting role I may have provided to the Board in the past.  No information was obtained from the board or obtained in the context of providing service to the board.)