Rooney Valley News

 

 

 

 

Folks have reached out to fact check some allegations popping up on Next Door.

 

 

1. Solterra is working with the board majority against the Green Mountain community.

 

No.

 

• Solterra gains nothing by keeping the board majority.  The only Solterra issue on the horizon is whether or not their IGA for sewer will be renewed in 2023.

 

• And note that the Solterra board is not representing the interests of the Solterra residents on the Big Sky issue.  So there is no “Solterra” advantage one way or the other.
  • The Solterra board threatened to jump on the bandwagon and sue Green Mountain along with Big Sky.
  • Big Sky’s attorney met secretly with the Solterra attorneys and talked them into filing suit.
  • The Solterra attorneys spent at least $40,000 secretly working on the lawsuit until  Solterra residents blew the whistle and pointed out that it might not be a good idea to sue Green Mountain since the IGA to provide Solterra sewer expired in two years.
  • The Solterra board retreated and backed down – withdrew the alleged claim
  • Here are two blogs on it at the time:

 

http://solterracommunity.org/index.php/2019/05/11/solterra-residents-now-paying-attorney-to-force-green-mountain-water-and-sanitation-district-to-un-terminate-the-election-night-iga-establishing-big-sky-as-the-new-sanitation-district-for-rooney-valle/

 

http://solterracommunity.org/index.php/2019/05/18/solterra-board-representing-big-sky-brookfield-and-not-the-residents-attacks-green-mountain-water-and-sanitation-board-demands-reinstatement-of-the-big-sky-iga/

 

• • The point is, the Solterra board is still working closely with the developers in Rooney Valley.

 

• • Not so much the Solterra residents who continue to challenge the board’s allegiances.

 

• • The same Solterra residents who joined the Green Mountain board majority back in August 2018 to fight to give the residents – all the residents – a seat at the development/public policy table.

 

• The Solterra residents are customers of Green Mountain just like Green Mountain residents.  They pay for sewer just like Green Mountain residents pay for sewer.  They want the same healthy fiscally responsible sewer utility that Green Mountain wants.

 

• Solterra residents don’t get to vote.   But getting the right to vote is not likely to happen soon, if ever.  They would just be happy to keep getting the sewer service from Green Mountain.  Otherwise it’s fancy porta-pottties in the back yard.

 

• One of the most vocal and representative spokesperson for the recall group and the development community is Devon Neill – she is a Solterra resident.    She obviously didn’t make any deal with the board majority she is trying so hard to persuade you all to recall.

 

• Linnea Hauser, one of the strong leaders of residents in the Solterra community has long been active in getting residents a seat at the table.  She led the group that successfully opposed four mega carlots at Dinosaur Ridge.  Notably Devon Neill fought to build 4 mega carlots at Dinosaur Ridge.

 

• Linnea Hauser was also one of the leaders of the successful effort to stop 11 years of cancelling public elections in Solterra and replace the developers employees with residents on the Solterra board.  Adam Paul fought against that effort.

 

• Linnea Hauser’s similar efforts to support the Green Mountain board are not Solterra v. Green Mountain issues as portrayed by the recall group.   They are efforts to “get all residents a seat at the table”.

 

• All the residents.  All the rate payers.  Solterra and Green Mountain.

 

 

2.  The Green Mountain Board was a train wreck until the Recall Group (Led by Christopher Smith (Arlen), Brenda Bronson, Mike Muller and eventually Rita Bertolli and Adrienne Hanagan and Devon Neill) stepped in to “show them how to run the district”.

 

• No.  The opposite is actually true.

 

• As you can see from the documents cited in the following history, the Green Mountain board, beginning soon after their election May 8, 2018, took charge to address the “election night Big Sky IGA” and responsibly evaluate and then terminate the Big Sky IGA.

 

Specifically:

 

• September, 2018 the new (current) Board issues a resolution announcing that it is evaluating the IGA and may cancel the agreement

 

Green Mountain Declaration 9-4-2018

 

 

 

• November, 2018 the new (current) Board issues a notice of preliminary defects associated with the Big Sky IGA

 

Green Mountain Declaration November 2, 2018

 

 

• December 2018 Big Sky repeatedly threatens to sue the new Green Mountain Board in response to the new board’s efforts to address the problems with the Big Sky IGA.

 

 

• January, 2019 there is a public hearing and debate about terminating the Big Sky IGA

 

 

• April 9, 2019 the new (current) Board passes a detailed resolution terminating the Big Sky IGA with a list of reasons for saying “no” to this second attempt at extraterritorial service for Rooney Valley.

 

Green Mountain Adopted Resolution Terminating Big Sky IGA April 9, 2019

 

 

• June, 2019 Big Sky sues the new Green Mountain board followed by four additional lawsuits by Rooney Valley developers – CDN (Big Sky’s developer), Green Tree, Stream Realty (Green  Tree’s developer) and Cardell Homes.

 

Green Mountain Lawsuit CDN – Complaint

 

 

• August 19, 2021 the District Court dismisses all the cases essentially holding that the Big Sky IGA was illegal and void.

 

Order_ Cross Motion for Summary Judgment

 

Order_ Responses to Order of May 6 2021

 

Order_ Motion for Leave to File Amended Answers

 

 

• An appeal, previously filed prematurely, is expected to be re-filed.

 

Here is the full history:

 

History of Extraterritorial Service in Green Mountain

 

 

• The Board was doing fine until their attorney Counsel Timmins panicked and tried to settle the case as quickly as possible.
  • There was a mediation session in  January that she did not prepare the board for and when Jeff Baker and Karen Morgan attended they were overwhelmed, as was Counsel Timmins.
  • From that point on Timmins and Hanagan worked as hard as they could to get the majority to settle, including
    • meeting with the plaintiffs counsel secretly without telling the board majority
    •  obstructing efforts by the majority to look at all the options and hold a public hearing on all the options
    • Hanagan having her own public meeting without waiting for the board majority and then at that meeting throwing the other board members under the bus by falsely stating they did not want to talk with the public and they were “anti-development”.

 

• Fortunately, the board majority’s persistent  position to look at all the options and include the public in the evaluation resulted in delay which led to the Court dismissing the cases.
  • Dismissal  obviously came as a complete surprise to Counsel Timmins who was rushing to settle before the Court decided the motions.
  • During her solo public meeting Hanagan argued that the public needed to persuade the majority to settle as soon as possible before the Court ruled on the motions for summary judgment.
  • Hanagan made this argument clearly because she and Timmins thought they were going to lose.
  • The majority, and many residents, however continued to believe the District was right – and the Court ultimately agreed, despite Hanagan and Timmins and the recall group’s effort to rush to a settlement.

 

 

 

3.  The recall effort started when Timmins was fired. 

 

• No.  The recall  was all about getting a board majority that would allow the developer community to use Green Mountain as a more profitable way to develop Rooney Valley.   (See the history above.)

 

• It actually started with a facebook conversation initiated by Smith (Arlen), Eadie and Furman.

 

Source of Green Mountain Recall: “You are Just a Toaster; An Appliance”

 

 

• Clearly keeping Timmins is part of that goal
  • to use Green Mountain to provide sewer to Rooney Valley instead of the Rooney Valley sewer district – Mt. Carbon
  • Timmins was convinced – apparently after strategy sessions with Rita Bertolli  (who first introduced Timmins to the board in 2018 and again in 2019)  referenced in emails with Rita Bertolli
  • that the “Rooney Valley Development solution” required a new IGA between Green Mountain and some, but not all, the Rooney Valley developers.
  • The board majority was not part of those “strategy” conversations.

 

• The board majority’s decision to terminate Timmins was based on
  • open and reckless efforts by Timmins to
  • absolutely control the board,
  • keep her income flow and
  • drive a settlement
  • She openly attacked her own client
  • She falsely accused the board of violating the Open Meetings Act and
  • the board lost any confidence in her ability to represent them

 

• Clearly, Timmins didn’t have confidence in her own work and there we’re no “legal heroics” involved in the Court dismissing the case.
  • In fact, it would have been legal malpractice not to make the arguments that the Court ultimately used to dismiss the cases.

 

See:

Don’t Change Horses Mid-Stream – Unless Its Trying to Drown You and Head Backwards (And Other Updates on the Big Sky Litigation)

 

• Allegations that the board majority was violating Title 32, the bylaws and the Open Meetings Act were all based upon “rules” that Timmins and the recall group made up.
  • Timmins had no Title 32 experience or experience giving advice to water and sanitation boards
  • Despite open efforts by Timmins and Hanagan to obstruct efforts to get Title 32 counsel, the board majority ultimately retained experienced Title 32 counsel
  • Rita Bertolli – one of the recall leaders – actually called each of the new attorney firms applying for the Title 32 position before the interviews to try to scare then away from working for the board
  • the experienced Title 32 counsel explained that the board majority had done nothing to violate Title 32, the bylaws and certainly not the Open Meetings Act.
  • Indeed, counsel had to repeatedly stop Hanagan who insisted on trying to stop the majority from voting or even meeting.

 

 

Green Mountain Board – New Counsel Corrects Misguided “Mandates” by Recall Group and Recall Group Vows to File Yet Another Lawsuit

DIRECTOR HANAGAN ATTEMPTED “COUP”, “NEW” OLD LITIGATION COUNSEL, COURT CLEANS UP TIMMINS’ LOOSE ENDS IN THE LITIGATION, NEW SPOKESPERSON FOR BERTOLLI, HANAGAN, RECALL GROUP AND ROONEY VALLEY DEVELOPER PLAINTIFFS

 

 

 

• If the recall group wants to change the “rules” for running meetings, there is a process to do that – amend the bylaws.   Recall is not the way to change the bylaws.

 

• The board majority has already indicated an interest in changing the bylaws.   Now that the board is no longer fighting the recall group’s efforts to hijack every meeting (an event that started in January and continued until Timmins was replaced), they have stated there will be time to address the bylaws after the recall election.

 

 

If anyone else has significant issues that need fact checking, don’t hesitate to contact me.

 

John Henderson