Less than an hour. Really well spent. If you want to watch and listen to a very thoughtful, professional and enlightening conversation by the Green Mountain Water and Sanitation Board, here it is:
They called a special meeting to review the status of the effort to select a new manager, discuss and clarify the board’s direction.
The result was a very interesting, revealing and educational conversation about the district, including references to over all goals and approaches.
From a public administration perspective it was a nice illustration of citizen representatives implementing the important and not always understood difference between
- who makes policy decisions and
- who implements policy decisions and
- respecting those very different but complimentary roles.
And for those who don’t know the new board majority well, it is a great way to get to know them just a little better.
Legal updates:
1. Brookfield and Solterra Expired IGA
This Monday at 3 pm and then Tuesday at 9 am (October 9 and 10) is the hearing on Brookfield’s motion for preliminary injunction – basically the trial on whether or not the Court will force Green Mountain to provide additional extraterritorial service after the IGA expired.
The status conference getting ready for the hearing next week was public and online. It just concluded and the parties and the court are ready to go. The hearing (“trial”) will be in person, not online.
Brookfield filed a “stipulation of facts” that all the parties, including Green Mountain agreed to. Since it was prepared by Brookfield, predicatably it is structured and phrased in a way to try to convey the impression that Green Mountain is required to provide additional extraterritorial service pursuant to the 2008 IGA even though it expired in January.
Here is that stipulation of facts:
What the Brookfield “stipulation of facts” doesn’t say of course is that
- there is no right by Brookfield to receive or obligation by Green Mountain to provide service outside its district boundaries without the IGA
- Solterra is outside the Green Mountain district
- Solterra was inside the Mt. Carbon sanitation district
- The only way Green Mountain could provide service to Solterra was by amending its service plan to obtain permission to provide service outside its boundary through an IGA or by bringing them into the district
- Under Adam Paul’s “leadership” in concert with the developer, they did neither and “just did an IGA”.
- That IGA expired in January
- Once the IGA expired, there was no obligation to provide additional service outside the district.
- The Solterra Service Plan (Fossil Ridge Metro District) references the expectation that Green Mountain will provide sanitation service but the Service Plan was not an agreement to provide that service. It was not an essential element of a service plan and created no obligation on anyone’s part that the sanitation service would be provided by Green Mountain.
-
- Green Mountain was not a party to the Service Plan.
-
- The only document creating an obligation on Green Mountain was the IGA and it expired in January.
- Neither does it explain that the Solterra residents (“Fossil Ridge Metro District”) are facing a significant claim against them for more developer “reimbursements” by Brookfield and may be motivated to support Brookfield’s claim against Green Mountain in exchange for Brookfield easing up on that claim for additional developer “reimbursements”.
Of course Brookfield would not agree to these facts so it will be up to Green Mountain’s counsel to present evidence and argument to clear the fog for the Court so the facts will be clear.
Here again are the details of the history of extraterritorial service:
2. Big Sky
Green Mountain forfeited:
- right to jury trial (with no apparent concessions by the developers in exchange – such as withdrawing their claim for money damages)
- right to take the depositions of key people who jammed through the “election night” Big Sky IGA with no public hearing, such as:
-
- Charles Norton (counsel for Big Sky who apparently orchestrated the last minute and premature signing of the agreement who, as a witness, is prohibited from continuing to represent Big Sky during the trial)
-
- Tom Norton (the lead director for Big Sky and formally lead director of Solterra who essentially directed the effort to get the Big Sky IGA).
-
- Adam Paul who as mayor had the City Attorney re-write the original legal memorandum that concluded Big Sky (Norton and Morton) needed to file a request for a modification to the Big Sky service plan (and public hearing) to do what the IGA did (without a modification and public hearing). Paul was actively engaged in working to undermine the new Green Mountain Board who were “asking too many questions” (my words). He apparently had a very close relationship with both Morton and Norton.
At the last minute, the parties extended the discovery schedule for “30(b)(6) depositions” which are depositions of people the other party designates will represent their positions on certain issues. In this context the people being deposed are chosen by Big Sky, not Green Mountain.
The next major event will be the motion for summary judgment. If Green Mountain’s motion falls short or the new majority on the board decide not to file a motion then we will have a clear indication that they intend to settle and not try to regain the win Green Mountain achieved in May, 2021. Stay tuned. The deadline for filing the motion is November 17.