Subscribe to Our Newsletter
RV News April 11, 2023

 

 

The agenda for this evening’s meeting  emphasizes that –whether or not Green Mountain Water and Sanitation District should provide service to developers outside the district – is still an important issue.

 

  • Motion to Amend the Bylaws to require public hearing and a 4 vote majority before even considering to apply to amend the Service Plan to allow service outside the district.

 

  • Big Sky litigation report and executive session

 

 

 

And there is an election.  Ballots will be mailed in several days.  

  • Three candidates for two positions. 

 

  • Here is the link with their bios links in the blue box to the left of the screen

https://www.greenmountainwater.org/district/board/election_information/index2.php

 

 

There are two incumbents:  

 

  • Karen Morgan  has been a strong voice demonstrating command of the issues, leadership and an unwavering commitment to the residents.  She is a proven veteran having successfully helped manage several crises over the past three years and consistently “spoke truth to power” when challenged.

 

  • Throughout her first three years and again referenced in her bio she has fought hard to maintain the integrity of  Green Mountain Service Plan’s limit to providing service to the residents and opposed providing service to developers outside the district.  

 

Here is her bio:

https://www.greenmountainwater.org/district/board/election_information/bio_1.php

 

 

  • Todd Hooks is just finishing his first year of service.  As noted in his bio, he is a long term resident, real estate agent and experienced chief financial officer.   He has been a regular contributor to the district’s work on all issues and is particularly focused on finances.

 

  • He does not take a position in his bio on the issue of providing service outside the district boundaries.  However the public record of his contributions do not indicate he is willing to follow the preceding boards’ “Ka-Ching” policy of sharing profits with developers using Green Mountain to develop outside its limited territory in violation of the Service Plan, without public hearing and against the interests of the residents.

 

Here is his bio:

https://www.greenmountainwater.org/district/board/election_information/bio_3.php

 

 

  • Randy Little is a newcomer seeking election to the board for the first time.  He has experience in the computer industry and running his own company providing computer support services.  

 

  • Even though his history of the relevant events is a little off, in his bio he takes a strong position in favor of following the Service Plan and limiting service to the residents of Green Mountain and not providing profit driven service to developers outside the district.

 

Here is his bio:

https://www.greenmountainwater.org/district/board/election_information/bio_2.php

 

 

It is testimony to Green Mountain’s stand out quality commitment to the integrity of representative local government that the residents have three good choices.  A commitment that Jeff Baker and retired member Alex Plotkin fought hard to deliver since May, 2018, and Karen Morgan since 2020.  

 

It wasn’t always that way and could easily change course if the residents don’t remember the history.  Numerous blogs document the details but to quickly refresh:

 

  • The night of the 2018 election, Big Sky and related developers persuaded the board being voted out of office to approve an incomplete IGA that violated the Service Plans of both Big Sky and Green Mountain

 

  • That IGA in no uncertain terms expressly created a NEW sanitation district to be run by Big Sky which only had one primary director – the developer.  The sewer connection would not only serve Big Sky but Big Sky would then sell sewer to other developers in Rooney Valley outside Big Sky’s district and profit from those sales.   Big Sky’s attorney argued in 2018 that Big Sky would be the “master meter” for all of Rooney Valley.

 

  • And at all times, Rooney Valley had and still has its OWN sanitation district – Mt. Carbon – which is currently providing the sanitation services to the Red Rocks Centre development next door to Big Sky in Rooney Valley.

 

  • To be sure, service to Solterra was the first and only other violation of the limit in Green Mountain’s Service Plan to providing service to the residents, but the Solterra IGA was limited in time to January 15, 2023, and limited to Solterra.  

 

  • Big Sky’s IGA was not limited in time and not limited to Big Sky – it established Big Sky as a new sanitation district to provide service for Big Sky and all the other developments in Rooney Valley outside Big Sky’s territory – through Green Mountain.

 

  • When the Solterra violation of the Service Plan was first published, it was too late to reverse but the expiration date of January 15, 2023 subjected any requests for additional service to be measured by conformity to the Service Plan and the best interests of the residents.  

 

  • When the new directors in 2018 realized what was going on with the Big Sky IGA, they first tried to work with Big Sky to conform to the Service Plans and when Big Sky refused, had no alternative but to terminate the incomplete IGA to the extent it wasn’t already void.

 

And don’t forget, some residents like Christopher Arlen (Smith), the unsuccessful city council candidate and one leader of the recall movement two years ago, promoted at the time that Green Mountain is “just a toaster”.  That Green Mountain’s only job is to provide service and make money for Green Mountain and the developers as directed by the developers.  Don’t think, just “toast”.

 

That is the non-resident developer’s definition of Green Mountain’s mission.

 

Of course the developer’s definition of Green Mountain’s mission assumes the developer’s interests are the priority, not the residents’ interests.  

 

Fortunately, since 2018 the board has put the residents’ interests first  –  as defined by the residents  –  not the developer.  

 

Each new election and each vote will determine whether that continues to be the case.  

 

And to be sure, the residents’ interests may change.  

 

But the board should hear it from the taxpaying voters, not the outside developer interests, for whom the public interest is only defined by what generates the most profit.

 

Vote like your future depends on it.   Because it does.