The Crested Butte News Serving the Gunnison Valley since 1999
More time to consider the arguments
Gunnison District Court Judge Steven Patrick has agreed to revisit a ruling made late last year that required Gunnison County to certify a mill levy for the Prospect Subdivision over an objection from county attorney David Baumgarten. He also granted the town of Mt. Crested Butte intervener status in the case.
After the court ruled on a request by the attorney for the Prospect homeowners governing board, which placed an additional 50-mill levy on property in the subdivision, the county filed a motion requesting the judge reconsider the ruling he made after a short deliberation at the end of the day December 20.
At the time the request for the additional mills was made, the subdivision’s mill levy had reached a limit laid out in a service plan between the subdivision and the town. With the additional court-ordered 50 mills in place, the subdivision was in violation of its agreement with the town.
As a result, Mt. Crested Butte attorney Kathleen Fogo told the court she felt the town had a vested interest in the case and that the town’s interests weren’t adequately represented by any of the other parties involved in the lawsuit.
Patrick explained in his ruling that he made the decision to accept the motion to reconsider, in part, because of the circumstances under which he made his original ruling, requiring the county to levy the additional mills.
“The Court expressly invited such an opportunity based on the extremely short notice and deadline for ruling on this matter filed December 20, 2013 and which required a hearing December 20, 2013 and required a ruling that day to meet a deadline set by statute of December 22, 2013 such that Gunnison County could take timely action prior to the deadline for certification of the mill levy,” Patrick writes.
In concluding his letter, Patrick lays out two of the possible arguments he expects to consider during the hearing of the motion to reconsider. But he does not open the case back up to the county’s restriction of the mill levy.
To Patrick, the relevant issues are “whether the fact pattern here warrants a material modification from the service plan and/or whether the service plan is an unconstitutional limitation on the powers of the district.”
The hearing on the motion to reconsider is scheduled for Tuesday and Wednesday, March 11-12.
