Question from the floor: Should 1041 be voted on before or after final plat, and what criteria should be used to decide water quantity issues when there was conflicting expert testimony and factual data?

Tighe said that he decided, in one case referenced, that the 1041 hearing was a good idea only after the final plat approval. Regarding criteria, he said he voted in accordance with the county expert's opinion that there was sufficient water.

Hodges said that he was one who presented a document that there was not enough water in that case. He feels that the 1041 hearing should come earlier in the process. Hodges believes that people should be able to turn in factual information early so that it can be thoroughly considered before votes are taken.

Hopkins said that it makes sense to gather information ahead of time. Finding out how much water is needed for a project is not only important for the community, but also for the developer. He explained that he was not an expert in this area but commissioners had access to experts and broad information in all fields and should consider all opinions before proceeding.

Abcarian thinks that all conditions attached to projects should be explored prior to permitting. The water issues should be "hammered out first."

Novkovic also believes that 1041 issues should be approved first rather than after the fact. Developers should have studies completed for water usage of their projects. He believes the county needs to develop its own set of resources and expertise independent of outside experts. There are various organizations at the state and federal level that the county can consult to determine flow rates. The county also has to consider how the usage will affect future county growth.

James joined other candidates, except Tighe, in saying that the 1041 permits should be settled before final plat approval, not after. She said that the 1041 must be paid for by the applicant and other hearings should be postponed until the county's experts can investigate and evaluate the project.

Question #2: Why should we have to follow Land Use Regulations in Park County? Why can't a property owner do anything they want with their own land? What enforcement exists for LUR?

Hodges said that the county does have enforcement in place but insufficient resources to pursue every case. Therefore, the county has to address the very worst problems as a priority but to do it with consideration. He assured the audience that he would use the LUR enforcement options.

Hopkins said that he struggles with the whole concept of LUR. He feels that a landowner should be able to reasonably do anything they want with their land but there is a concern for one landowner having a junkyard that draws down all surrounding property values. He believes in reasonable enforcement by the government. Hopkins related an experience he had talking with a real estate agent who showed him some properties he couldn't sell because of the extreme junk on surrounding properties.

Abcarian supports LUR in the county but would like to avoid pitting neighbor against neighbor. She believes that what one neighbor does strongly impacts the lives of others. Landowners need to recognize that they do not have unlimited control of their land and that their property rights are given to them by the LUR.

Novkovic believes that the LUR should be followed as a guideline. They provide a foundation on how we affect our neighbors. He believes landowners have every right to use their own land but should not infringe on their neighbors' rights nor force devaluations of property. Novkovic thinks that the LUR should be a "living document."

James notes that the county is attempting to enforce the LUR but that more enforcement is needed. The LUR will expand the values of property. The county is currently engaged in a major revision of the LUR right now and the revised documents are posted on the county's website. She stated that the revisions should be done by the end of the year. Citizens should be heard in this process.

Tighe said that the commissioners try to listen to everyone that comes forward regarding land use. He said that he does what he can to help walk them through the LUR and try to give them the opportunity to use the land that they bought the way they want to. Tighe said that they have worked with code enforcement for four years and now have standard procedures in place.

Question #3: To John: when you ran in 2004, you promised to do two things: Clean up Road and Bridge and have an office in Bailey. Road and Bridge is worse than ever and there is no office in Bailey. (Other candidates also comment)

Tighe answered that he meets with constituents in Bailey whenever they ask and he feels that Road and Bridge needs more sources of funding. He wants to raise taxes and believes that the tax increases he has supported would only have cost $15 per person out of pocket per year. Inflation has negatively affected R&B spending.

Hopkins said that commissioners need to be sensitive to the various regions of the county. He said that his truck would be his mobile office and he would publish an itinerary of times he would be available in the various districts. Hopkins believes that a hearing should be held in the community that will be impacted by the issue under consideration.

Abcarian said that the commissioners were not giving the R&B department the money and resources it needs to do its job. They need to be fiscally responsible but also fund the work that needs to be done. We have excess fund balances that could be used to provide services. She doesn't approve of trying to pass a new sales tax, again, because the county does not trust the commissioners. More accessibility will help with the trust issues and her phone number is available to the public.

Novkovic said that he would continue to use advertising as he is now for his campaign, but it would be advertising times and places for the citizens to have access to the commissioners and the process. He said the problem is bigger than just Road and Bridge and that the services should be organized under a "Public Works" department. He said the county needs a comprehensive plan to deal with all public services.

James believes that commissioners need to move around and be in all parts of the county. She supports regular "town hall" meetings. She stressed that she has always made herself available to citizens and has a published phone number. The state goes through 15-20 year economic cycles and, in a down cycle, impact fees for road maintenance would not be very helpful. She says that creative funding sources need to be found and that the county should use its money to provide services instead of just maintaining excessive fund balances on the books.

Hodges suggested a negotiation with the fire department to use an office that the county has for building and zoning in the fire station. (That office is currently not available as a Commissioner's office.) He would like to use focus groups to gather input from various parts of the county. He said that the county should manage Road and Bridge without additional money. Hodges said that he would go to every employee and listen to their ideas and problems.

Question #4 - Are free county cleanup days helpful in promoting LUR compliance?

Abcarian said that she had concerns with R&B having the responsibility for getting rid of the large quantities of junk because it puts extra pressure on them and takes away from their other duties.

Novkovic said he would like to see more recycling incorporated into the cleanup days. He said that some materials could also be recycled for use in the county's road base.

James would also like to see more recycling incorporated into the cleanup. She suggested there should be more of an effort made to provide assistance to those residents who were unable to get their household junk to the cleanup collection sites.

Tighe said that the cleanup days cost the county $45,000 to $60,000 per year and were popular and heavily used.

Hodges would like to emphasize volunteerism to cover the labor required for the cleanup days instead of using R&B employee hours and overtime.

Hopkins supports the cleanup program and is in favor of recycling as well. He said his study of criminology taught him that problems start in one place and then expand in concentric circles. He feels the land use problems expand on the same principle. He would like to see other types of cleanup as well, like drug-prone areas.

Question #5 - Are the expenditures of the Sheriff's Department too high and what is your position on the Park 'n Ride near the county line?

Novkovic said that he does not yet have a clear enough working knowledge of the county spending to address the budget levels of the Sheriff's Office. On the Park 'n Ride, he notes that 2/3 of the local population work in the metro area. But he doesn't think it's fair to ask the whole county to pay for one group of bus riders. He says that there is another lot 5 miles further that can be used for free.

James strongly supports public transportation and would like to see it expanded. She notes that the county is not part of the RTD district and that the $4 parking fee is cheap compared to the cost of gas to drive to the city. James does not support subsidizing the parking lot for one group of riders. As to the Sheriff's budget, James thinks they could replace vehicles less often and otherwise they all need to look at the whole budget as it stands when it is completed later this year.

Tighe supports the Park 'n Ride and would have the county pay for the parking lot for the group of riders that currently take the bus from Pine Junction to town. He believes that business in Park County is enhanced with the availability of the Park 'n Ride. He also thinks it helps property values in the area. As to the Sheriff's budget, he said that all departments were told they would have to cut 10% from their budgets for the upcoming year.

Hodges (a Pine Junction area resident) also thinks that the Park 'n Ride would enhance property values in the area. He thinks that the county should invest in the free lot for the riders if it doesn't take away from other programs. Regarding the Sheriff's budget, he says he doesn't want to take a chance on playing with the law enforcement budget and risking public safety.

Hopkins said that subsidizing the free parking lot for the small minority who use it is unfair to the vast majority of taxpayers who would be footing the bill while also paying their own commuting expenses. He is not against the Park 'n Ride facility - in fact he strongly supports the use of mass transit and says that his family also uses it. However, he is not in favor of the whole county paying for the fees of this minority at one bus stop. Hopkins thinks that the Sheriff is working to trim fat from the budget. He encourages them to only allow emergency take-home vehicles when they are driven to local areas inside the county.

Abcarian supports mass transit but not the subsidy. She sees future problems and demands if the county sets a precedent and starts funding this particular cost. Abcarian acknowledges that it is a very touchy and very sad situation. She notes that the Sheriff's budget has historically been the "biggest slice of the pie." No one likes it, but cuts have been requested across the board and that department has to contribute as well.

Question #6: Last year, R&B received hundreds of thousands more than they anticipated. Instead of giving the public more service, the commissioners used that money and more money cut from road maintenance services for the citizens to pay down debt instead. Also, the commissioners charged almost $140,000 (40% of the general fund disbursements) to miscellaneous expense without any explanation of the type of expense. (Clarified that the amount charged to Miscellaneous Expense was in the one month of June 2008.) Outside related story

Tighe said that they took the money away from public service to pay down debt so they could borrow more money to buy more equipment. He said that he could guess at what the miscellaneous expense was for, i.e. $30,000 here and $12,000 there. He added that anyone who wanted to know more could request the documents and detail from the county and it was available to anyone who wanted it. The county receives cash back awards for charges to the credit cards, according to Tighe.

James did not like the use of Miscellaneous for any cost description except very small amounts. She said that everyone was already asking questions about spending and would naturally be thinking, "What are they doing with that money anyway?" She said bringing down the R&B debt if possible is good, but that they should not have cut services by hundreds of thousands of dollars to do it.

Hodges said that expenditures had to be described for the taxpayers and that they had work to do in the accounting department. He said that the finance director was trying to do a good job and they would just try to fix it and not continue to do that in the future. He said it wasn't any big deal.

Hopkins believes that what has been done in the past impacts the future. He said that in his experience of defending audits, he could never defend the charging of $140,000 listed as Miscellaneous Expense. Hopkins notes that it is a matter of violating public trust. He said that trust had been lost and needed to be rebuilt and things like that didn't help. He said he would not allow that kind of charge to be undefined.

Abcarian said that there was no reason for this to happen. Business has been handled this way by this board but a change in attitude and philosophy is needed. She believes that the county business is closed to the public and that makes this type of occurrence worse. She said she would put a stop to it and believes that it is a huge issue.

Novkovic said that business owners could not just lump such a charge in Miscellaneous but would have to itemize the types of expenses included in the payment. He said it is easy to generate a list under the total to break down the descriptions.

Dan Drucker spoke on behalf of Referendum 5A asking for permission to incur debt for the construction of a required reservoir in the Jefferson-Como area.

All but one of the candidates supported the issue and praised the organization for its work on water preservation in the county. Hodges said to Drucker, "You have really helped me out in our subdivision so I will support anything you want to do." Except for Tighe, other candidates said they support the CCWCD construction financing as long as it did not cause a tax increase. Drucker assured the candidates that no tax increase was involved and the organization's revenues were sufficient to cover the debt service. John Tighe said that he needed to do more reading on the issue.

For links to information on all candidates, please visit: Park County Bulletin Politics: 2008 Candidates