I think that I boo-boo'd when I set this one up. All of you last replied to
me rather than to the list. I can set up the outbound headers so that
reply-to's go back to the list, but that doesn't appear to be what I was
thinking about this before <{;^(
People should try posting to [EMAIL PROTECTED] and see what
happens. I want to reply to somebody else's headers.---- Here's another story. My talking points have been these: Land Use: Public and Private Utilization - In favor of private land holders, want to get the county out of the land biz. Representation: Access to Choice - Three commissioners to Five Principled Command: Following the Rule of Law - Instilling confidence by following the laws; staying out of conflict and out of court; saving tax dollars. Agency Fees: Redirecting the Income - Letting elected offices keep their fee proceeds and stop giving it to the commissioners. Decision Making: A Historical View - Forcing a change in record keeping and an adherence to rule of law. Remedial actions are warranted. That's five. The land use bit is big. It's probably the thing that will bring me a Republican swing vote if the R candidate isn't strong on suppressing land use and county open space. In places like Hygiene and Lyons, most people haven't much use for Boulder, Boulder County, and Longmont sucking up their resources. Lyons has a huge liberal streak being a Boulder refuge, and they've brought Boulder with them. They own the majority of the businesses, but the core voters of the town are solid red necks. Lyons is where Ron Stewart lives, and also his coached successor, Ben Pearlman, a BC land use lawyer. Not only is land use of a concern for rural land owners, but urban areas as well. It can always be easily pointed out that most communities in BC follow the lead of the county. Codes and enforcement could be something to worry about over the coming eight years (two terms). Even the actions that Boulder itself has codified has emulated elsewhere in much shorter periods of time. So a apartment building owner in downtown anywhere should be concerned that a commissioner will pass a ruling that will in three years be passed by his own town council, and directly affect him. Land use has two issues right now. One is quite pressing and that is the proposed Gold Hill nature / recreation area; and the other is conjoinment. I call it conjoinment because it is the proper term. The commissioners have this code that they ruled on in the 80s that joins any privately owned properties that touch each other. By the same owner, of course, but it makes them one piece. The zoning on the properties change and the owner can't build unless he has 35 acres. The acreage deemed necessary to conjoin properties seems to be quite a bit less than what can be used to establish a codified building site. They invent rules that they themselves won't abide by. The Gold Hill deal is that the BLM has about 40 something acres of land scattered around between Gold Hill and Sunshine. It wants to give it to BC. There are at least 50 private land owners that have been freely traveling over BLM land for literally a hundred years who will now be subjected to open space rules; road closures; fencing; posting; loss of access; and finally the big one - eminent domain. The county could and certainly has a history of pulling eminent domain; making land unsellable; condemning it; and forcing people out for pennies. The real kick in the ass is that the people that they will be doing their regular commissioner's dance with are the very people that are likely to sue them into the next century. All at taxpayer expense. No reason to bother with the land at all. Just own it, and leave everything be. Be a good neighbor if needed (wildfire). --- For those new to BC: we have three commissioners. Nice when this was a county of 90K, but we are about 325K now, and that's probably a conservative estimate based on tax roles. Something more equitable must be looked at. A republican board (representative) by wards or districts; or just two more. I like five. ---- Decision making and command are topic for those that have any sort of history with the commissioners at all. Others probably couldn't get it. No one can believe it when they see it themselves. The process that the commissioners use to reach any decision is undocumentable. Past decisions are kept in a pile in a small room. They are not indexed in any way. The commissioners seldom look at them, and few are brave enough to dig. ---- Agency fees are an issue that I've only just noticed from within the county. There's lots going on within the county that represent out of control big government that perpetuates itself. In this particular case it is about who gets to handle the money. User fees and certain county level taxes are governed by the state. Buying a temp tag for a car (a state permit) costs the same in every county, and the county is paid by the state for providing that service. The clerk collects about $3.2M each year. The Sheriff had cash receipts of about $400K this year. The treasurer; assessor; Surveyor; and other elected offices collect fees for services. Currently elected officials a demanded by the three kings to hand over all the booty. Then they can beg for its return through budget requests. One wonders how many people this stupidity employs? Let them keep their income and operate without spreading the wealth. Paul Tiger
