Judge orders Boulder County to refund millions to homeowners wrongly assessed for road improvements – 7NEWS Denver TheDenverChannel.com. (video at link includes interviews with BoCo FIRM chairman Chuck Wibby and County Commissioner Elise Jones )
Regarding locating funds to pave the subdivision roads…
Wibby says it’s a simple allocation issue.
“Up until the mid-90s, the County Commissioners would allocated approximately 8-percent of the property taxes that everybody paid, for road maintenance,” he said. “Beginning in the mid-90s, they reduced that from 8-percent to 1-percent.”
I find this comment by Elise Jones troubling…
Jones says the County remains committed to trying to solve the funding issue.
“We don’ have any more money that we did before,” she said. “In fact, we have far less with the increased price tag of flood recovery.”
When asked what the next step will be, Jones replied, “We’re open to suggestions.”
She said they may go to individual subdivisions and ask homeowners if they want to form their own improvement district, but added, “That hasn’t worked in the past.”
Let’s review what Judge Lowenbach said regarding the definition of maintenance and Boulder Counties responsibilities… (I’ve emphasized the portions that Elise Jones needs to pay special attention to)
It is clear that the County faced difficult financial issues that caused the neglect of its dedicated subdivision roads. Roads that are not chip sealed and resurfaced will deteriorate. If deterioration is severe enough, the road will have to be reconstructed. These maintenance activities are necessary to the upkeep of the roads and to keep them operative, and are included in the term “maintenance.”1 Property owners whose roads were accepted for maintenance understood that term to include all activities necessary for upkeep of roads. While it clearly had the duty to maintain those roads, the County did not perform that duty. Had the County abandoned any of the roadways in question, the rebuilding of the road would likely constitute an “improvement.” However, none of that occurred.
The court concludes that the technical meaning of an “improvement” as set forth in the statute does not consist of restoring some item of public property to its former usefulness but rather it means the building of something that is either entirely new or constitutes an appendage or addition to an existing item of public property. None of the intended uses of the funds to be raised by the LID fall into this category.
And as Chuck Wibby notes above, the County did maintain the roads, by the common sense definition, up until 1995. At that time, they started “raiding” the road fund for other activities.
It seems County Commissioner Elise Jones, not to be confused with her Boulder City Council sister Suzanne Jones, believe that because the County (supposedly) doesn’t have the money, then they can once again get the subdivision neighborhoods to pick up the tab. Elise, you and your fellow Commissioners are responsible for re-interpreting the meaning of the word “maintenance”. Boulder County LOST. Take responsibility and pave our roads in a timely fashion.
