Robert spoke at public comments. The commission was not going to engage or debate, just listen. My camera ran out of memory, so I don't have the whole speech Robert gave. But, what I have, I will post on my FB page (Donna Winslow-Arnove) as I have not had any luck with posting videos to this web site.
Our next step is to seek legal counsel to find out if we have a chance of suing the county. If the attorney believes we can win the case, let us know if you wish to be part of the class action lawsuit, which would entitle you to mitigation funds.
The following is the speech Robert gave to the Commission today:
At the previous Commission Meeting, some of the homeowners in Alpine Breckenridge (subdivision #1) were present to express their concern and desire to have the County assist with road maintenance. The request was met with a resounding “no” from the commission and we were told to try to form a P.I.D. in the neighborhood to alleviate some of the problems. In speaking to neighbors and researching the ownership of vacant lots, many issues have come to the forefront. At the last meeting, Ric Pocius testified that the county only receives about $2500.00 total from the taxpayers in the area for road maintenance, and he estimated the cost to provide the requested service would be about $14,000.00 per year. Based on those figures, the commission decided that it would not absorb the cost at the expense of all taxpayers in Summit County. The fact is that we are collectively paying about $24,000.00 annually to have about two miles of road maintained by a private contractor. Ric used a figure of $7000.00 per mile that the county estimates for road maintenance.
Logic would dictate that because our roads do not meet County standards, the County is saving $14,000.00 per year by not having to provide service. Once you apply the formula used to turn down our initial request to all neighborhoods with dirt/gravel roads that meet the “standard”, the same revenue shortfall exists in every one of them. This fact led me to a conversation with Dave Beard at Roads & Bridges, where he explained that this was true, and that the State HUTF money that the county gets for maintaining accepted roads pays only about 3% of the overall cost of maintaining dirt/gravel roads.
So I asked, “Where does the money come from to make up the difference?”
He replied, “The general fund”.
So, now that we know that the taxpayers in our subdivision are helping to pay for road maintenance in similar and adjoining neighborhoods, and at the same time having to pay privately for the service on our roads, needless to say, we are outraged. Therefore, I am requesting that the commission reconsiders their previous decision and negotiates in good faith to resolve this issue by either granting us a tax reduction based on the $7000.00 per mile that the county is saving, or deposits the same $7000.00 per mile into a P.I.D. annually to offset some of our costs. If this would result in a tax increase to all Summit County homeowners to pay for our road maintenance, so be it, as we have been paying for their service all of these years. This is the only way a P.I.D. is even feasible. The County already owns five vacant lots in this area, for which zero dollars can be collected. If it were to pass, a substantial tax increase to fund it would undoubtedly lead to further delinquencies, thus reducing the number of participants and reducing the amount of revenue going into the County’s general fund.
The Commission can choose to do nothing leaving us no other option but to pursue a legal remedy. Given the facts, I can’t help but believe that a neutral court would find overwhelmingly in our favor, and to defray the cost of this action, we would have to seek restitution for all of the years we have subsidized other neighborhood’s road maintenance and gotten nothing in return. Now that would be an unnecessary burden on the taxpayers of Summit County, and I believe would subject the Commission to public ridicule when this obvious inequity is exposed. I promise you that I have the time, the resources, and the will to take this unpleasant course of action if the Commission does not choose to take a proactive approach in resolving this fairly.
