EXTRATERRITORIAL SERVICE TO BROOKFIELD:
Even though Brookfield lost and the Court said Green Mountain is not required to provide Brookfield with service outside the district, Brookfield persists in demanding service . . . Just because. And they filed an appeal.
Given the way these things go, including Brookfield’s aggressive demands at every meeting since they lost and the pending appeal, Brookfield will likely try to persuade Green Mountain to provide the service in return for dropping the appeal from the Court’s decision – as if that was something of value to Green Mountain. “Even though we sued you and lost, we will continue to drag this on and keep going with the appeal unless you give us what the court said you don’t have to give us”. I know it sounds a little foolish, but it’s just how they think. Kinda like the Black Knight in Monty Python’s Holy Grail who has lost both arms and is trying to kick his opponent.
The new majority led by Dave Garner is working through it. As he stated here, Mr. Garner is “on the fence”. He essentially said he could vote to give Brookfield new service outside the Green Mountain district or not. He challenged Karen Morgan and Dave Wiechman to prove to him he should NOT vote to provide service outside the boundary.
(Beginning at 1:08:50 are Mr. Garner’s comments – there is discussion prior about 1:06:06 and following):
https://youtu.be/G63insv3enA?si=jh6hVTYc3mdyySQn
That had to be frustrating to the two residents who appeared in person and the one resident on the phone during the meeting last month who said, as did a very large majority of the voting residents in the 2021 recall election – “NO WE DON’T WANT TO VIOLATE THE SERVICE PLAN AND PROVIDE SERVICE OUTSIDE THE DISTRICT”
It was like they weren’t even there “I’m on the fence” Mr. Garner said. “Give me a reason not to provide service outside the district” (paraphrasing).
Here, again, are some of those reasons:
1. Big Sky is salivating over the possibility that Green Mountain will give Brookfield service outside the district. As long as Big Sky is pending, once Green Mountain opens that door it will be impossible to close. Even giving service for one single stall restroom outside the district violates the service plan. Then there will be no way to explain or justify why service is provided to Brookfield and not Big Sky.
2. Of course, this issue is bigger than Dave Garner sitting on the fence. There should be a public hearing on this issue.
- In 2008 the Adam Paul Green Mountain Board decided to violate the Service Plan and provide service outside the district (to Brookfield / Solterra) without a public hearing.
- May 18, 2018 as they were being voted out of office the directors approved a developer “cram down” – the Big Sky IGA – that was later terminated. That vote took place, like the one Mr. Garner plans to make, without a public hearing.
- Now Mr. Garner is “sitting on the fence” poised to do the same thing – vote to provide service outside the district boundary without amending the Service Plan and without a public hearing.
3. Green Mountain’s job isn’t to make money – make a profit off of selling sewer service. It is a government providing a public service based upon its duty to responsibly manage the distribution of a very scarce and valuable essential public resource.
- The May 2018 directors who did what Big Sky told them to do, later said it was all about “Ka Ching” – the bell of the cash register.
- Making as much money as they could in a deal with the developer to, essentially, profit off selling sewer to residents who had no choice – at inflated prices.
And, again, to clear up some of the confusion about the Brookfield/Solterra request:
There are two completely separate agreements between Green Mountain and Solterra (Fossil Ridge Metro District – the developers love to name the districts (Fossil Ridge) something different from the community (Solterra) so it will be hard to find information about them).
1. Let’s get the second one out of the way because it is not relevant to the extraterritorial service issue. The second agreement between Solterra (Fossil Ridge) and Green Mountain is an agreement that is still in place to provide maintenance to the Solterra sewer system – inspection and cleaning. Solterra residents pay for that just like hiring a plumber to come out and inspect and clean the pipes in your home. Separate document, Separate date, irrelevant to extraterritorial service.
- Because of the way Brookfield, the developer of Solterra (a Canadian billion dollar company), structured the relationship, the Solterra residents, not Green Mountain, OWN ALL THE PIPES IN THE GROUND from the hookup to Green Mountain’s pipe inside the Green Mountain district to homes inside the Solterra district.
- That means, when the pipes need repair or replacement, thats on Solterra residents, not Green Mountain. Inside the Green Mountain district if a pipe breaks and needs repair or replacement, Green Mountain district takes care of it. In Solterra, the Solterra residents take care of it.
The maintenance agreement has nothing to do with providing hookups to developments which are outside the Green Mountain district (extraterritorial service). In the maintenance agreement, Green Mountain charges time and materials to look inside and clean the sewer pipes. I believe the schedule was every couple years. Solterra could do the inspection and cleaning themselves or hire someone else to do the inspection and cleaning. The pipes are Solterra’s pipes just like the pipes inside your house are yours to inspect and maintain.
2. The first agreement provided hook ups (taps) to a development (Solterra) which was physically outside the Green Mountain district. Note that the Solterra residents aren’t part of the district. They are customers, but not residents. The will never be taxed or vote on Green Mountain issues. Extraterritorial service through an agreement – IGA. It did basically three things:
- First, the Solterra IGA provided an agreement to “reserve” – make available a number of taps – hookups for service. That part of the agreement to reserve hookups for service expired January 15, 2023. As of that date, whatever hookups Brookfield (the Solterra developer) secured – that was it. No more were allowed after whatever hookups Brookfield secured as of January 15, 2023. The right to the hook ups no longer exists after January 15, 2023. Any additional hookups after January 15, 2023 are NEW extraterritorial service. Whether it’s one or one hundred.
- Indeed, Brookfield just sued Green Mountain essentially saying the right to those hookups never expired. But the Court just recently said Brookfield was wrong. Since Brookfield was not entitled to service outside the Green Mountain district, and the only reason they had service was because of the agreement, and the agreement expired January 15, 2023, Brookfield did not have a right to new hookups after January 15, 2023.
- Second, the agreement provided all the arrangements for building the Solterra system under the supervision of Green Mountain
- Third, the agreement provided the arrangements for paying for it all, including taking the sewage from the taps that were hooked up by January 15, 2023. Notably, the 2008 board subscribed to the “Ka Ching” theory of government and obtained inflated profits through the developer “on behalf of” the future residents. “Ka Ching”. (And keep in mind, it was Brookfield who wrote the agreement and set the “drop dead” date of January 15, 2023. They gave themselves 15 years to build out Solterra.)
So, what’s Mr. Garner teetering on the top of the fence about – he is considering helping out Brookfield and follow the “Ka Ching” theory of government advanced by Adam Paul and sell sewer hookups for a development outside the district for an inflated profit charged through the developer “on behalf of” the future residents and paid to Green Mountain.
- Without a public hearing
- Without amending the Service Plan to get permission to provide services outside the district.
(Note that Title 32 allows special districts like Green Mountain and Solterra (Fossil Ridge) to provide services outside the district. BUT, it has to be part of the Service Plan. For example, the Solterra Service Plan expressly provides permission to build the dog park and widen Alameda and pay for six miles of water pipe, all outside the district. BUT it is in the Service Plan. With all the financials to support the extraterritorial service. There is no such permission in the Green Mountain Service Plan to provide hookups outside the Green Mountain district to Brookfield in Solterra. It can be done – but requires an amendment (in this case likely approved by the Court) and . . . public hearings).
So, Mr. Garner is still teetering. I can’t tell you that you will make any more of a difference to Mr. Garner than the speakers did at the last meeting. But it’s worth a try. And if you support extraterritorial service for Brookfield you should let Mr. Garner know that as well.
The vote on extraterritorial service will apparently be January 9, 2024. There has been this “dance” between Brookfield and the Board.
- Brookfield keeps demanding service and has appealed.
- The majority of the directors said at the last meeting they won’t provide service as long as the appeal is pending.
- I am confident Brookfield will now say by the January 9 meeting “we’ll be happy to drop the appeal in exchange for you doing what we want you to do”.
And then we’ll see which side of the fence Mr. Garner falls. Public hearing or not. Amend the Service Plan or not. Provide extraterritorial service or not.
Here is the link to the meeting January 9 at 6 pm. I’ll post the agenda once it’s published.
https://us06web.zoom.us/s/89533225776#success
Whatever the decision is, after the 2008 and May 18, 2018 experiences, if we have learned nothing more, we should have learned that this is a “big deal” and before the Board makes a decision about opening the doors to extraterritorial service, now that it is abundantly clear they have no obligation to provide service outside the district boundary . . . The board must have a public hearing – advertised well in advance – on whether or not to expand services outside the boundary of the district (and amend the Service Plan to do so).