The overriding issue in the recall effort is extraterritorial service.
As a matter of public policy is it in the best interests of the residents of Green Mountain Water and Sanitation District to provide sewer service to developments outside the district boundary.
Do the residents want to take sewage from outside their district into their system, reducing the capacity of Green Mountain to provide services for its own residents.
There are pros and cons each way.
And for the first time, this is not just a decision between the developer and the board. For the first time the residents are part of this conversation. Thanks to Jeff Baker and Alex Plotkin and Karen Morgan.
Here is what the recall group says about providing extraterritorial service to developments outside the district through a new IGA with the development districts who sued Green Mountain (it is now in the appeal stage following a decision in the board’s favor dismissing all the lawsuits.)
Devon Neill – the “outspoken” voice of the recall movement (Brenda Bronson says she is “brilliant”):
[Before the Court’s ruling dismissing the lawsuits]:
” I had the pleasure of speaking with Mr. Norton, Big Sky’s counsel, today. . . . You need to settle immediately.”
” . . . .if you do not, you are going to cost taxpayers a lot of money and the GM Board is going to look like idiots in front of a jury. . . .”
“. . . And in case I was not perfectly clear… the whole rallying cry that Big Sky/Developers acted “unreasonably/in bad faith” entering the IGA with GM looks like a complete lie . . .”
” . . . you breached the contract, the Big Sky/Developers look incredibly reasonable because look at what you did… None of you want to sit in front of a jury and defend what you did. . . .”
“. . . But if you push this to either a jury trial or force the Court to rule on the pending motions, this email string comes into evidence because Big Sky will call me as a witness to get the email into evidence and likely use very points that I have made herein, all common sense, to cross examine you on why you pushed this to a jury trial.
“There is no excuse for what occurred. Call the special meeting and give Jo Timmons authority to settle. ”
“In my opinion, you all need to resign as part of your act of taking responsibility for what you have done.”
“I will not post publicly if you act quickly. But if you do not, then I will not hesitate to post.”
[After the Board won and the Court dismissed the lawsuits]:
“. . . The question for GM voters is whether to recall these “no growthers” . . .”
“To explain the current recall fight succinctly, Green Mountain won the litigation with Big Sky and the old GM Big Sky IGA is void.”
“The Big Question is whether to enter a NEW IGA with Big Sky.”
“Regarding signing a “New IGA with Big Sky”… Here’s the deal. There is a $4M to $5M economic benefit to GM with virtually zero negative harms to GM.”
“Remember Regulatory Takings… any law or regulation that makes land undevelopable is a violation of the US Constitution unless the government pays the land owners just compensation… which we now know from Developer litigation against Green Mountain . . . ” [note there is no “taking” where the land is outside Green Mountain’s jurisdiction – their boundary. Rooney Valley has its own sanitation district.]
Christoper Smith (Arlen) :
See:
The following is a post from his January, 2021 Facebook page (before he removed it from public view).
Mr. Smith (Arlen) agrees with Mr. Eadie and Mr. Furman that terminating the May 8, 2018 IGA was wrong.
He states the board should be recalled because they terminated the May 8, 2018 IGA:
Here he is on April 6 explaining that the board is just an “appliance” – a “toaster” to do whatever the developer decides:
That is the question. Who decides.
If you are just an “appliance” or a “toaster”, the developer decides whether or not you provide service outside the district boundary.
From a published interview during the 2018 election critical of the citizen initiative – Proposition 200 – limited the rate of development in Lakewood:
“What are your top three priorities if elected?”
Christopher Arlen: “Moving Lakewood beyond 200 is imperative. The distal impacts to economic development, low income housing, and sales tax revenue impacts our collective future. . . .”
Brenda Bronson – supporter and financial backer for Christoper Smith (Arlen):
April 6, 2021 – Ms. Bronson supporting Director’ Hanagan’s position to settle with a new IGA:
Mike Muller: (on April 6 after telling Mr. Plotkin to keep is mouth shut and calling Mr. Plotkin and Ms. Morgan a couple of “clods” and again on April 20), supporting a new IGA to get the money:
Rita Bertolli – campaign manager for Christoper Smith (Arlen) Ward 4 City Council
In a blog entry that has since been removed, she stated “the recall committee does not have a position on extraterritorial service”.
Sounds like the recall members and supporters actually do have a position on extraterritorial service. Perhaps it is changing.